Eclipse Community Forums: eBPM » Welcome to eclipse.ebpm

Help

Home

Home » Archived » eBPM » Welcome to eclipse.ebpm

Show: Today's Messages :: Show Polls :: Message Navigator

Welcome to eclipse.ebpm [message #511569]

Tue, 02 February 2010 05:01

Eclipse Webmaster

Messages: 676732
Registered: July 2009

Senior Member

Welcome to the Ebpm Project. The folks who requested this newsgroup will post a welcome message shortly, explaining what this exciting new group is all about. In the meanwhile, here is some more information about the Eclipse newsgroups:

Eclipse project proposals page:
http://www.eclipse.org/proposals/

Web access to this group:

http://www.eclipse.org/forums/eclipse.ebpm

This newsgroup is a public group, so please do not post private or personal information. If you have any questions about the Eclipse newsgroups, please contact webmaster@eclipse.org .

-- Eclipse Webmaster

Report message to a moderator

Re: Welcome to eclipse.ebpm [message #514180 is a reply to message #511569]

Fri, 12 February 2010 17:30

Etienne Juliot

Messages: 19
Registered: July 2009

Junior Member

Hello,

I'm Etienne Juliot, a commiter on SCA project, a member of SOA IWG and I'm a contributor on Eclipse Modeling community.

I have two questions :
- what are your relation with the Eclipse Modeling MDT / BPMN2 project which aims to provide a referenced metamodel of the OMG BPMN2 standard ?
- I see you plan to do code generation. In SOA TLP, we already use Eclipse Acceleo project and if you want to use it, we will help you. (and it will be helpful in a view to have a consistency between SOA projects).

Report message to a moderator

Re: Welcome to eclipse.ebpm [message #519619 is a reply to message #514180]

Tue, 09 March 2010 14:04

Andrea Zoppello

Messages: 48
Registered: July 2009

Member

Hi Etienne,

Thank you for your interest, see my inline response:

1) The first version of eBPM project will rely on STP Intermediate Model ( will be Mangrove ) as it's metamodel... this is because there's already an integration between eclipse BPMN Modeler and the STP intermediate model.

Using the intermediate model let us to keep the code generation part separated from specific process modelling tools.

The focus of the project is to provide a BPM ( not necessary BPMN ) solution on top of OSGi.

BTW we're very interested in very interested in the BPMN2 metamodel and in a collaboration within it..., i think a very usefult thing will be to have a BPMN2 -> IM or to directly have the code generation part of eBPM starting from BPMN2 metamodel.

BTW a thing that is not clear to me is that if there is a BPMN2 Modeler as eclipse project, i'm not sure about that but i think that ( at the moment ) BPMN modeler is not using this...

2) Regards Acceleo, the initial code generators of eBPM will be java based ( we'll take the stp intermediate model ) and generate code for the technology we want.

Regards technology related to model transformation/code generators i'm really interested in..., so i see no problem in considering acceleo as a potential technology to look at.

Andrea

Report message to a moderator

Re: Welcome to eclipse.ebpm [message #519711 is a reply to message #511569]

Tue, 09 March 2010 18:02

Adrian Mos

Messages: 20
Registered: July 2009

Junior Member

Hi Andrea,

This looks like a very promising project indeed! I think that the Mangrove project is good fit for the transformations and this approach would be completely complementary to using transformation technology from Acceleo.

BPMN2 should be supported in the future by Mangrove as long as it becomes adopted by the BPMN modeler that is available in the SOA TLP.

Regarding transformations, I understand that you'll be using Mangrove to generate stuff for the BPM Gateway. I think that for monitoring information, the Mangrove instance could also be used to transport such monitoring data back into any kind of editors that are used in Eclipse SOA. So monitoring would be used not only to display such data in a console, but to feed it back to the editors which were used in the design of the deployed artifacts. Any thoughts on this?

Cheers,
Adrian.

Report message to a moderator