[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
|
Re: [stp-pmc] BPEL and STP con call
|
Thank you for the reminder, Mike, I've been remiss in not getting
this out
earlier. Let me know if I've either missed anything out, or put in
something
that is incorrect.
Attendees:
Antony Miguel
Alex Boisvert
Hugues Malphettes
Simon Moser
Michal Chmielewski
Oisin Hurley
Carl Trieloff
The intent of this call was to introduce the attendees and to have
a discussion around the role of BPEL in STP and the possibilities for
cooperation between STP and the BPEL Technology project.
Some history was recalled about initial interactions with Kevin McGuire
regarding the BPEL technology project and STP in the past.
Oisin stated that BPEL is very important for developers of SOA
applications
and that having a full BPEL build/deploy/debug tool available in open
source
and under an Eclipse license would be very valuable to organizations
that
use BPEL as part of their solutions.
Simon and Michal gave an update on the status of the BPEL Technology
project and elaborated on future plans.
There was a general consensus that SOA Tools would be an appropriate
place from
where such a tool could be delivered.
Two possible courses of action were discussed.
1. Integration of the output of the BPEL technology project with STP
- i.e. a developer could download the BPEL editor plugins and
effectively
drop them into a workbench that already hosted STP and they
would 'work
together'.
2. The BPEL technology project could move from its current location
and
go to STP, so that a fully integrated BPEL offering could be
constructed
2) above had the most discussion. There was a concern from Simon and
Michal that moving the BPEL editor project to STP would involve a
level of
subsumption that might be unacceptable to the project's community and
sponsors. Alex Boisvert echoed this concern with respect to the BPMN
project, stating that the projects are useful enough in their own right,
and that requiring users to download all of STP just to use a BPMN
editor
was not a good idea.
No decisions were made on this call - the issue about subproject
subsumption
and visibility is to be discussed on the PMC list, but this thread
hasn't
started as of yet.
best regards
Oisin
