ode-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Davanum Srinivas" <dava...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: are we really gonna end up with 1 engine anyway?
Date Tue, 21 Feb 2006 15:12:05 GMT
Lance,

> I am currently looking into a BPEL 2.0 parser

Looked at bpel-parser in pxe yet?
(http://svn.intalio.org/viewrep/PXE/pxe/bpel-parser). If it does not
serve your purposes, the pxe folks may(hopefull will :) be able to
whip it to shape to suit your purposes. WDYT?

thanks,
dims

On 2/21/06, Lance Waterman <lance.waterman@gmail.com> wrote:
> James,
>
> This sounds reasonable to me. Perhaps a starting point would be a set of
> BPEL 1.1/2.0 acceptance tests ( which have been mentioned in other threads
> )?
>
> I am currently looking into a BPEL 2.0 parser for the Sybase engine. My plan
> was to migrate our current BPEL 1.1 tests to BPEL 2.0, however I
> think having a common set of BPEL acceptance tests in Ode would be a good
> idea.
>
> I have not had a chance to look through the PXE contribution for BPEL
> acceptance tests. What do folks think about merged BPEL acceptance tests as
> a starting point?
>
> Lance
>
>
> On 2/20/06, James Strachan <james.strachan@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > There seems to have been an assumption that there should only be one
> > orchestration/BPEL/workflow engine in the Ode project. So far I seem
> > to be MrNegative repeatedly doubting whether this assumption is valid
> > or useful so I just wanted to get feedback on peoples thoughts on
> > this specific issue, particularly from the Sybase/PXE folks.
> >
> > Here's my personal take:
> >
> > Right now today the Sybase code is geared more towards being a
> > generic orchestration/workflow engine that today supports BPEL 1.1
> > and can support other orchestration/workflow languages and could be
> > ported to 2.0 without huge amounts of effort. PXE is specifically
> > geared towards BPEL 2.0 as its primary design which could well be a
> > good thing if you want a BPEL 2.0 engine - though I do find the PXE
> > code harder go grok  - but maybe that's because its more BPEL 2.0
> > specific.
> >
> > In summary they are both very different, solving things in different
> > ways - I see value in both codebases as they are today. I also see
> > areas they can collaborate (as PaulB mentioned recently). So we can
> > definitely have code reuse across the two engines. However I honestly
> > have no idea if we can ever merge the two codebases into one - the
> > experiment has some merit for sure but it could be too big a leap.
> >
> > Putting that ServiceMix hat on again; we certainly have a use case for
> >
> > * a general purpose orchestration engine that we can use from Java code
> > * BPEL 1.1
> > * BPEL 2.0
> > * any new XML language that comes out in the orchestration/workflow
> > space
> >
> > So both engines have immediate value to ServiceMix.
> >
> > Putting that Ode hat on again, my personal priorities on the ODE
> > project are are to get both engines working well in their new Apache
> > home, then looking to where we can reuse code & infrastructure across
> > the two. But unifying the code into one engine isn't on my personal
> > list of itches to scratch (and I've lots of itches :). I'm perfectly
> > happy for them to stay separate and let reuse happen iteratively over
> > time.
> >
> > Specifically to Sybase & PXE folks,  what are your thoughts?
> >
> > James
> > -------
> > http://radio.weblogs.com/0112098/
> >
>
>


--
Davanum Srinivas : http://wso2.com/blogs/

Mime
View raw message