topic Re: BPMN 2.0 and the future of BPEL in Alfresco Archive

BPMN 2.0 and the future of BPEL

activiti-admin — Fri, 21 May 2010 09:54:28 GMT

Does your standardisation on BPMN 2.0 mean that you do not believe BPEL has a future?

Re: BPMN 2.0 and the future of BPEL

jbarrez — Mon, 24 May 2010 14:37:30 GMT

BPEL has its use cases (ie service orchestration in a world where everything is WS-*).
But we believe that for doing BPM, BPEL simply doesn't cut it. And we're not the only company thinking that.
BPMN 2.0 is clearly the way to go if you want to do BPM.

Re: BPMN 2.0 and the future of BPEL

jeff1 — Tue, 25 May 2010 00:25:13 GMT

hi, jbarrez.
I wonder weather activiti will support service orchestration, since BPMN2 do has such features(receive/send/service/etc.)

Re: BPMN 2.0 and the future of BPEL

jbarrez — Tue, 25 May 2010 07:33:20 GMT

@Jeff: service(java call/WebService call/Rest call?), send / receive is planned to be implemented.

Re: BPMN 2.0 and the future of BPEL

jeff1 — Tue, 25 May 2010 09:47:16 GMT

wonderful!
activiti would be a very strong opponent of some commercial products if activiti supports the features like service orchestration / mainstream ERP system access capabilities / etc., such features will strongly enhance the capabilities of system integration.
although activiti may be not positioned as such positioning, I think jBPM is more concerned about the human task, and activiti will do more

Re: BPMN 2.0 and the future of BPEL

activiti-admin — Wed, 02 Jun 2010 09:07:02 GMT

Thanks for the response.

Whilst I agree that BPEL suits Web service Orchestration, I cant see the point in having two standard. So if there is to be standardisation on BPMN then it will have to subsume BPEL's capabilities as in our experience we don't have BPM process that don't have Web service calls in them.

Re: BPMN 2.0 and the future of BPEL

jbarrez — Fri, 04 Jun 2010 11:59:43 GMT

@Guest: I agree, there is no point in keeping the two standards alive. BPMN 2.0 has all the capabilities on board that BPEL has.

Re: BPMN 2.0 and the future of BPEL

activiti-admin — Thu, 10 Jun 2010 15:58:23 GMT

BPMN and BPEL are not at odds. Not only that, BPEL support is required for "BPMN Complete Conformance". If you don't believe me, look at the <a href="http://www.omg.org/spec/BPMN/2.0/">most recent BPMN spec</a>. In section 2. Conformance, it says that the only way to get "BPMN Complete Conformance" is to have support for (among other things) the "BPEL Process Execution Semantics Conformance type".

Re: BPMN 2.0 and the future of BPEL

wir33658 — Fri, 11 Jun 2010 07:30:58 GMT

wonderful!
activiti would be a very strong opponent of some commercial products if activiti supports the features like service orchestration / mainstream ERP system access capabilities / etc., such features will strongly enhance the capabilities of system integration.
although activiti may be not positioned as such positioning, I think jBPM is more concerned about the human task, and activiti will do more

Yes, and hopefully it lets you integrate with code easily, because in this respect it will become easy for automated systems to be integrated in a process flow (no - or almost no - human interaction).