Eclipse Community Forums
Forum Search:

Search      Help    Register    Login    Home
Home » Modeling » BPEL Designer » Is there already runtime support for the BPEL processes generated here?
Is there already runtime support for the BPEL processes generated here? [message #3953] Wed, 05 April 2006 09:46 Go to next message
Eclipse User
Originally posted by: ms.yahoo.com

Hi!

The aim of this project is to support WS-BPEL 2.0. Is there an engine out
there that supports the used WS-BPEL 2.0 constructs. I know WS-BPEL 2.0 is
not finished, but it would be helpful to know if the processes modeld with
this tool can be deployed to any engine already or in the near future.

Thanks!

Michael
Re: Is there already runtime support for the BPEL processes generated here? [message #3959 is a reply to message #3953] Thu, 06 April 2006 00:35 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Eclipse User
Originally posted by: shoffman.forestay.com

I'm not sure about WS-BPEL 2.0, but Intalio claims support for "BPEL 2.0":
http://intalio.com/products/server/index.html

"Michel Schned" <ms@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:8d8d4b9b7ca83611d23a0f910ac3696e$1@www.eclipse.org...
> Hi!
>
> The aim of this project is to support WS-BPEL 2.0. Is there an engine out
> there that supports the used WS-BPEL 2.0 constructs. I know WS-BPEL 2.0 is
> not finished, but it would be helpful to know if the processes modeld with
> this tool can be deployed to any engine already or in the near future.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Michael
>
Re: Is there already runtime support for the BPEL processes generated here? [message #3965 is a reply to message #3959] Thu, 06 April 2006 04:56 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Eclipse User
Originally posted by: ThomasSchulze.de.ibm.com

As Michel wrote, WS-BPEL 2.0 is not finished, there are further normative
changes decided yesterday on the BPEL TC conf call, and there are still some
normative changes discussed, please have a look at the not closed
(received/open) issues:
http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/17546/WS_B PEL_issues_list.html

The target of the project is to support WS-BPEL 2.0 by end of this year when
we will hopefully have a final WS-BPEL 2.0 specification. We will discuss in
May or later which (example) runtime to select. One criteria is the
supported level of WS-BPEL.

Do you guys know possible open source runtimes which will support full
WS-BPEL 2.0 by end of this year?

"Steve Hoffman" <shoffman@forestay.com> wrote in message
news:e125qk$nei$1@utils.eclipse.org...
> I'm not sure about WS-BPEL 2.0, but Intalio claims support for "BPEL 2.0":
> http://intalio.com/products/server/index.html
>
> "Michel Schned" <ms@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:8d8d4b9b7ca83611d23a0f910ac3696e$1@www.eclipse.org...
> > Hi!
> >
> > The aim of this project is to support WS-BPEL 2.0. Is there an engine
out
> > there that supports the used WS-BPEL 2.0 constructs. I know WS-BPEL 2.0
is
> > not finished, but it would be helpful to know if the processes modeld
with
> > this tool can be deployed to any engine already or in the near future.
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> > Michael
> >
>
>
Re: Is there already runtime support for the BPEL processes generated here? [message #3983 is a reply to message #3965] Sun, 09 April 2006 18:14 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Eclipse User
Originally posted by: shoffman.forestay.com

Hi Thomas,

ActiveBPEL 3.0 will support WS-BPEL 2.0. They haven't announced a release
date, but it should be available within a couple of months after the
specification is finalized. FWIW, it's licensed under the GPL (so I don't
know if it's suitable for targeting by STP).

Steve

"Thomas Schulze" <ThomasSchulze@de.ibm.com> wrote in message
news:e12l4q$hu6$1@utils.eclipse.org...
> As Michel wrote, WS-BPEL 2.0 is not finished, there are further normative
> changes decided yesterday on the BPEL TC conf call, and there are still
> some
> normative changes discussed, please have a look at the not closed
> (received/open) issues:
> http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/17546/WS_B PEL_issues_list.html
>
> The target of the project is to support WS-BPEL 2.0 by end of this year
> when
> we will hopefully have a final WS-BPEL 2.0 specification. We will discuss
> in
> May or later which (example) runtime to select. One criteria is the
> supported level of WS-BPEL.
>
> Do you guys know possible open source runtimes which will support full
> WS-BPEL 2.0 by end of this year?
>
> "Steve Hoffman" <shoffman@forestay.com> wrote in message
> news:e125qk$nei$1@utils.eclipse.org...
>> I'm not sure about WS-BPEL 2.0, but Intalio claims support for "BPEL
>> 2.0":
>> http://intalio.com/products/server/index.html
>>
>> "Michel Schned" <ms@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:8d8d4b9b7ca83611d23a0f910ac3696e$1@www.eclipse.org...
>> > Hi!
>> >
>> > The aim of this project is to support WS-BPEL 2.0. Is there an engine
> out
>> > there that supports the used WS-BPEL 2.0 constructs. I know WS-BPEL 2.0
> is
>> > not finished, but it would be helpful to know if the processes modeld
> with
>> > this tool can be deployed to any engine already or in the near future.
>> >
>> > Thanks!
>> >
>> > Michael
>> >
>>
>>
>
>
Re: Is there already runtime support for the BPEL processes generated here? [message #3989 is a reply to message #3965] Wed, 12 April 2006 12:48 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Eclipse User
Originally posted by: alex.guizar.jboss.com

Thomas,

JBoss jBPM BPEL will support WS-BPEL 2.0 after the OASIS TC releases it in
October, assuming the agenda proceeds as planned.

IP might be an issue, tough. Are there any requirements on the terms under
which a BPEL runtime is licensed in order to be selected as example?

In the case of JBoss jBPM BPEL, the license will be as close as possible to
LGPL, excluding or ammending any terms which are incompatible with any IPR
statement made by TC members.

-Alejandro

"Thomas Schulze" <ThomasSchulze@de.ibm.com> wrote in message
news:e12l4q$hu6$1@utils.eclipse.org...
> As Michel wrote, WS-BPEL 2.0 is not finished, there are further normative
> changes decided yesterday on the BPEL TC conf call, and there are still
> some
> normative changes discussed, please have a look at the not closed
> (received/open) issues:
> http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/17546/WS_B PEL_issues_list.html
>
> The target of the project is to support WS-BPEL 2.0 by end of this year
> when
> we will hopefully have a final WS-BPEL 2.0 specification. We will discuss
> in
> May or later which (example) runtime to select. One criteria is the
> supported level of WS-BPEL.
>
> Do you guys know possible open source runtimes which will support full
> WS-BPEL 2.0 by end of this year?
>
> "Steve Hoffman" <shoffman@forestay.com> wrote in message
> news:e125qk$nei$1@utils.eclipse.org...
>> I'm not sure about WS-BPEL 2.0, but Intalio claims support for "BPEL
>> 2.0":
>> http://intalio.com/products/server/index.html
>>
>> "Michel Schned" <ms@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:8d8d4b9b7ca83611d23a0f910ac3696e$1@www.eclipse.org...
>> > Hi!
>> >
>> > The aim of this project is to support WS-BPEL 2.0. Is there an engine
> out
>> > there that supports the used WS-BPEL 2.0 constructs. I know WS-BPEL 2.0
> is
>> > not finished, but it would be helpful to know if the processes modeld
> with
>> > this tool can be deployed to any engine already or in the near future.
>> >
>> > Thanks!
>> >
>> > Michael
>> >
>>
>>
>
>
Re: Is there already runtime support for the BPEL processes generated here? [message #3996 is a reply to message #3989] Thu, 13 April 2006 11:46 Go to previous message
James Moody is currently offline James Moody
Messages: 61
Registered: July 2009
Member
Alejandro Guizar wrote:
> Thomas,
>
> JBoss jBPM BPEL will support WS-BPEL 2.0 after the OASIS TC releases it in
> October, assuming the agenda proceeds as planned.
>
> IP might be an issue, tough. Are there any requirements on the terms under
> which a BPEL runtime is licensed in order to be selected as example?
>
> In the case of JBoss jBPM BPEL, the license will be as close as possible to
> LGPL, excluding or ammending any terms which are incompatible with any IPR
> statement made by TC members.
>
> -Alejandro

Hi Alejandro,

Regarding licensing, none of us are lawyers so we are mostly unqualified
to comment on compatibility of licenses and requirements. However, we
would certainly want to run something like this past Eclipse's legal
counsel (as well as our respective companies', if appropriate).

james
Previous Topic:Special visual representation for patterns?
Next Topic:We moved up
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Thu Apr 17 17:45:53 EDT 2014

Powered by FUDForum. Page generated in 0.01629 seconds