You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to user@tuscany.apache.org by "Benowitz, Michael" <Mi...@gdit.com> on 2008/08/25 21:27:42 UTC
How to extend BPEL support?
Hello,
I am interested in adding to Tuscany the ability to use an
already-running BPEL engine rather than launching its own embedded ODE
server. I would also like to make it support different BPEL engines
such as jBPM-BPEL and/or ActiveBPEL. How feasible is this, and what
kind of source code changes would it require?
Thank you,
Mike
Re: How to extend BPEL support?
Posted by Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com>.
How is it going with adding support for using an already-running BPEL
engine or adding support for jBPM-BPEL ?
Do you guys need any help ?
On Thu, Aug 28, 2008 at 7:57 AM, Benowitz, Michael
<Mi...@gdit.com> wrote:
> Luciano,
>
> Thanks for the info. As for using an already-running BPEL engine, the
> goal is simply to minimize the footprint; our customer anticipates
> having a BPEL engine running independently of SCA, so he doesn't want
> the SCA runtime to launch another one. I am not sure I understand what
> the issue is with this, other than the fact that the SCA runtime must
> know how to access the "remote server" and where *.bpel files need to be
> deployed; why would there be configuration conflicts?
>
> Mike
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Luciano Resende [mailto:luckbr1975@gmail.com]
> Sent: Monday, August 25, 2008 10:23 PM
> To: user@tuscany.apache.org
> Subject: Re: How to extend BPEL support?
>
>
> Great to see you guys interested in BPEL, see below for my comments :
>
> First, let me address the license issues, looks like jBPM-BPEL is
> CDL and we should be ok to use that in Apache, as for ActiveBPEL, this
> is GPL v2 and this is not compatible with Apache license and thus not
> permitted in Apache releases.
>
> As for the current BPEL support in Tuscany, we have developed two
> Tuscany extensions that plugs into Tuscany runtime, and provides
> support for (1) modeling the BPEL implementation (a BPELImplementation
> model object representing an <implementation.bpel> in an SCA
> assembly), (2) reading/writing <implementation.bpel> elements using
> artifact processors, and (3) the runtime behavior to start/stop the
> BPEL process and drive invocations to/from it, using a BPEL engine,
> ODE in the case of what is available today in Tuscany.
>
> In general we've tried to separate the model + XML read/write and
> the runtime behavior and we've packaged them in different modules, to
> allow for the kind of runtime extension that you're thinking about
> (another BPEL engine), without having to rewrite the model + XML
> read/write support. in the BPEL example, the model + XML read/write is
> in module implementation-bpel, the ODE specific runtime behavior in
> implementation-bpel-ode.
>
> So, in order to add support for another BPEL engine, we should
> leave the current implementation-bpel as is, you shouldn't have to
> make any changes to it (except for maybe changing implementation.bpel
> to implementation.bpel.ode), and for your specific runtime behavior
> implementation, create a new implementation-bpel-jbpm module, similar
> to implementation-bpel-ode, but using jbpm instead. To implement that
> module, maybe you can just start with a copy of
> implementation-bpel-ode or even something simpler like
> samples/implementation-pojo-extension for example (as
> implementation-bpel-ode contains quite a bit of ODE specific code
> which you won't need)
>
> Now, regarding your request to "to use an already-running BPEL
> engine rather than launching its own embedded ODE server", I'd like to
> better understand your requirements/scenarios. One of the issues I see
> with this is that your "remote server" will have it's own
> configuration, that would compete with the configuration that will
> come from SCA, so a user can't just change a web service endpoint in
> SCA for example and expect that it's gonna work, he has to (1) write
> the config in SCA (2) go call the server admin expert to change the
> remote server config manually to match what he said in SCA, etc..
> Having said that, I believe you must have some good
> requirements/scenarios and it's fine to play with this in Tuscany.
>
> BTW, I have created a project structure to help you guys get
> started [1], and it should be available in trunk at svn revision
> #688939.
>
> [1]
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tuscany/java/sca/modules/implementation
> -bpel-jbpm
>
>
> On Mon, Aug 25, 2008 at 5:22 PM, paul li <pa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I would be interested in doing the same, and would appreciate some
>> suggestions
>>
>> thanks,
>>
>> Paul
>>
>> On Tue, Aug 26, 2008 at 5:27 AM, Benowitz, Michael
>> <Mi...@gdit.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I am interested in adding to Tuscany the ability to use an
> already-running
>>> BPEL engine rather than launching its own embedded ODE server. I
> would also
>>> like to make it support different BPEL engines such as jBPM-BPEL
> and/or
>>> ActiveBPEL. How feasible is this, and what kind of source code
> changes
>>> would it require?
>>>
>>> Thank you,
>>>
>>> Mike
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Paul Li
>> my blog:- terraformartist.com
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Luciano Resende
> Apache Tuscany Committer
> http://people.apache.org/~lresende
> http://lresende.blogspot.com/
>
--
Luciano Resende
Apache Tuscany, Apache PhotArk
http://people.apache.org/~lresende
http://lresende.blogspot.com/
RE: How to extend BPEL support?
Posted by "Benowitz, Michael" <Mi...@gdit.com>.
Luciano,
Thanks for the info. As for using an already-running BPEL engine, the
goal is simply to minimize the footprint; our customer anticipates
having a BPEL engine running independently of SCA, so he doesn't want
the SCA runtime to launch another one. I am not sure I understand what
the issue is with this, other than the fact that the SCA runtime must
know how to access the "remote server" and where *.bpel files need to be
deployed; why would there be configuration conflicts?
Mike
-----Original Message-----
From: Luciano Resende [mailto:luckbr1975@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, August 25, 2008 10:23 PM
To: user@tuscany.apache.org
Subject: Re: How to extend BPEL support?
Great to see you guys interested in BPEL, see below for my comments :
First, let me address the license issues, looks like jBPM-BPEL is
CDL and we should be ok to use that in Apache, as for ActiveBPEL, this
is GPL v2 and this is not compatible with Apache license and thus not
permitted in Apache releases.
As for the current BPEL support in Tuscany, we have developed two
Tuscany extensions that plugs into Tuscany runtime, and provides
support for (1) modeling the BPEL implementation (a BPELImplementation
model object representing an <implementation.bpel> in an SCA
assembly), (2) reading/writing <implementation.bpel> elements using
artifact processors, and (3) the runtime behavior to start/stop the
BPEL process and drive invocations to/from it, using a BPEL engine,
ODE in the case of what is available today in Tuscany.
In general we've tried to separate the model + XML read/write and
the runtime behavior and we've packaged them in different modules, to
allow for the kind of runtime extension that you're thinking about
(another BPEL engine), without having to rewrite the model + XML
read/write support. in the BPEL example, the model + XML read/write is
in module implementation-bpel, the ODE specific runtime behavior in
implementation-bpel-ode.
So, in order to add support for another BPEL engine, we should
leave the current implementation-bpel as is, you shouldn't have to
make any changes to it (except for maybe changing implementation.bpel
to implementation.bpel.ode), and for your specific runtime behavior
implementation, create a new implementation-bpel-jbpm module, similar
to implementation-bpel-ode, but using jbpm instead. To implement that
module, maybe you can just start with a copy of
implementation-bpel-ode or even something simpler like
samples/implementation-pojo-extension for example (as
implementation-bpel-ode contains quite a bit of ODE specific code
which you won't need)
Now, regarding your request to "to use an already-running BPEL
engine rather than launching its own embedded ODE server", I'd like to
better understand your requirements/scenarios. One of the issues I see
with this is that your "remote server" will have it's own
configuration, that would compete with the configuration that will
come from SCA, so a user can't just change a web service endpoint in
SCA for example and expect that it's gonna work, he has to (1) write
the config in SCA (2) go call the server admin expert to change the
remote server config manually to match what he said in SCA, etc..
Having said that, I believe you must have some good
requirements/scenarios and it's fine to play with this in Tuscany.
BTW, I have created a project structure to help you guys get
started [1], and it should be available in trunk at svn revision
#688939.
[1]
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tuscany/java/sca/modules/implementation
-bpel-jbpm
On Mon, Aug 25, 2008 at 5:22 PM, paul li <pa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I would be interested in doing the same, and would appreciate some
> suggestions
>
> thanks,
>
> Paul
>
> On Tue, Aug 26, 2008 at 5:27 AM, Benowitz, Michael
> <Mi...@gdit.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hello,
>>
>>
>>
>> I am interested in adding to Tuscany the ability to use an
already-running
>> BPEL engine rather than launching its own embedded ODE server. I
would also
>> like to make it support different BPEL engines such as jBPM-BPEL
and/or
>> ActiveBPEL. How feasible is this, and what kind of source code
changes
>> would it require?
>>
>> Thank you,
>>
>> Mike
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Paul Li
> my blog:- terraformartist.com
>
--
Luciano Resende
Apache Tuscany Committer
http://people.apache.org/~lresende
http://lresende.blogspot.com/
Re: How to extend BPEL support?
Posted by Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com>.
Great to see you guys interested in BPEL, see below for my comments :
First, let me address the license issues, looks like jBPM-BPEL is
CDL and we should be ok to use that in Apache, as for ActiveBPEL, this
is GPL v2 and this is not compatible with Apache license and thus not
permitted in Apache releases.
As for the current BPEL support in Tuscany, we have developed two
Tuscany extensions that plugs into Tuscany runtime, and provides
support for (1) modeling the BPEL implementation (a BPELImplementation
model object representing an <implementation.bpel> in an SCA
assembly), (2) reading/writing <implementation.bpel> elements using
artifact processors, and (3) the runtime behavior to start/stop the
BPEL process and drive invocations to/from it, using a BPEL engine,
ODE in the case of what is available today in Tuscany.
In general we've tried to separate the model + XML read/write and
the runtime behavior and we've packaged them in different modules, to
allow for the kind of runtime extension that you're thinking about
(another BPEL engine), without having to rewrite the model + XML
read/write support. in the BPEL example, the model + XML read/write is
in module implementation-bpel, the ODE specific runtime behavior in
implementation-bpel-ode.
So, in order to add support for another BPEL engine, we should
leave the current implementation-bpel as is, you shouldn't have to
make any changes to it (except for maybe changing implementation.bpel
to implementation.bpel.ode), and for your specific runtime behavior
implementation, create a new implementation-bpel-jbpm module, similar
to implementation-bpel-ode, but using jbpm instead. To implement that
module, maybe you can just start with a copy of
implementation-bpel-ode or even something simpler like
samples/implementation-pojo-extension for example (as
implementation-bpel-ode contains quite a bit of ODE specific code
which you won't need)
Now, regarding your request to "to use an already-running BPEL
engine rather than launching its own embedded ODE server", I'd like to
better understand your requirements/scenarios. One of the issues I see
with this is that your "remote server" will have it's own
configuration, that would compete with the configuration that will
come from SCA, so a user can't just change a web service endpoint in
SCA for example and expect that it's gonna work, he has to (1) write
the config in SCA (2) go call the server admin expert to change the
remote server config manually to match what he said in SCA, etc..
Having said that, I believe you must have some good
requirements/scenarios and it's fine to play with this in Tuscany.
BTW, I have created a project structure to help you guys get
started [1], and it should be available in trunk at svn revision
#688939.
[1] https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tuscany/java/sca/modules/implementation-bpel-jbpm
On Mon, Aug 25, 2008 at 5:22 PM, paul li <pa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I would be interested in doing the same, and would appreciate some
> suggestions
>
> thanks,
>
> Paul
>
> On Tue, Aug 26, 2008 at 5:27 AM, Benowitz, Michael
> <Mi...@gdit.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hello,
>>
>>
>>
>> I am interested in adding to Tuscany the ability to use an already-running
>> BPEL engine rather than launching its own embedded ODE server. I would also
>> like to make it support different BPEL engines such as jBPM-BPEL and/or
>> ActiveBPEL. How feasible is this, and what kind of source code changes
>> would it require?
>>
>> Thank you,
>>
>> Mike
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Paul Li
> my blog:- terraformartist.com
>
--
Luciano Resende
Apache Tuscany Committer
http://people.apache.org/~lresende
http://lresende.blogspot.com/
Re: How to extend BPEL support?
Posted by paul li <pa...@gmail.com>.
I would be interested in doing the same, and would appreciate some
suggestions
thanks,
Paul
On Tue, Aug 26, 2008 at 5:27 AM, Benowitz, Michael <
Michael.Benowitz@gdit.com> wrote:
> Hello,
>
>
>
> I am interested in adding to Tuscany the ability to use an already-running
> BPEL engine rather than launching its own embedded ODE server. I would also
> like to make it support different BPEL engines such as jBPM-BPEL and/or
> ActiveBPEL. How feasible is this, and what kind of source code changes
> would it require?
>
> Thank you,
>
> Mike
>
>
>
--
Paul Li
my blog:- terraformartist.com