Friday, April 16, 2010

jBPM5 Request for Comments

Over the last few years, we have accumulated a lot of knowledge and experience in various BPM-related projects here at JBoss, and in an effort to consolidate that, we would like to combine our efforts in what will be the next generation BPM platform, called jBPM5.

jBPM5 will be based on the combined experience of jBPM and Drools Flow (and related projects like RiftSaw and Overlord), and will bring together the benefits of both solutions (and much more). As part of this process, we would like to ask you, our community, for feedback and assistance on this.

The architecture of jBPM5 builds on the experience that was built up over the past few years based on our customer feedback as well as strong community involvement. It will continue the vision of all of the constituent projects, so large parts of the architecture that is presented here will probably not come as a surprise to you, either because it already exists in a current project or because it has been on the roadmap for quite some time (e.g. BPMN2).

Nevertheless, wide feedback is very important to us, and we have therefore constructed a “Request for Comments” document which describes (what we believe could be) the new architecture of jBPM5. Now is the time for the community that has helped shape these projects so well in the past to do so again.

http://community.jboss.org/wiki/jBPM5RequestforComments

This not only includes an overview of the most important components, but also some of the key characteristics. Based on this architecture (and the feedback we receive), we will roll out a roadmap for jBPM5.

We would like to welcome any feedback feedback on this proposal, using the jbpm-dev@lists.jboss.org mailing list, or in private by sending your comments to your JBoss contact. If you want to subscribe to the jbpm-dev mailing list or browse the archive, use:

http://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbpm-dev

2 comments:

  1. Correct me if I'm wrong but... historically Drools and jBPM have been distinctly separate efforts (and with pretty different philosophies). Does this mark a significant change in the direction of the jBPM product? (The involvement of Drools people would indicate: Yes!)

    ReplyDelete
  2. We are still in the requirements and evaluation phase. If there are aspects that are important for you, then make sure you get involved.

    ReplyDelete