| RE: [alf-dev] No Reasons for Agila "Primary Choice" |
|
thank you for your comments. i did not suggest pxe, but
servicebus, which includes pxe. servicebus develops rather quick, and at that
time when you made your decision, pxe was not yet included. maybe i should also
say why i think servicemix would be a good choice:
technical:
* contrary to activebpel already
supports both ws-bpel 2.0 and
bpel4ws1.1
* additionally rule based
routing
* additionally
scripting (a very important interfacing issue)
* java business
integrations allowing different vendors to "plug and play"
* integrated in
application server or standalone mode
community:
* by far a larger developer community and
community support than activebpel
commercial background:
* integrated
in geronimo (ibm aquired geronimo development company)
* can be integrated in jboss
* ibm supports eclipse actively and it can be
expected it goes a similar
direction with
geronimo.
summary:
* further technological and
stability leadership of servicemix can therefore be
expected
* imo not choosing servicebus means
implementing/integrating similar technologies
to activebpel which needs resources and time.
even for a poc.
could you detail what servicebus or the included pxe is
missing compared to activebpel? or somehow publish your results ... i cannot
remember you mentioned your choice and the reasons on the mailing
list.
kind
regards,
rupert thurner
From: alf-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:alf-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Tim Buss Sent: Dienstag, 11. Oktober 2005 22:27 To: ALF Developer Mailing List Subject: RE: [alf-dev] No Reasons for Agila "Primary Choice" Thank you for posting this analysis. It is very
useful. I agree with your evaluation.
Just to be clear, Agila was formerly our preferred
choice before we had investigated it fully. However
it quickly became clear that is incomplete is some important
ways. It may be our primary choice in the futured depending
how it develops. Currently the BPEL part (Twister) is being merged with
Agila to become a full apache project so it may be a while before it settle in
and work in the BPEL part results. We looked at a number of Open Source
engines and only ActiveBPEL seemed to be
mature enough for our immediate needs. Consequently, ActiveBPEL was chosen as the target
for the POC. I believe this was discussed on the newsgroup or in the
mail list but I apologies if that was not made clear in an obvious
way.
PXE is on the
list as an example implementation in the future. We have started to look at
it internally but it will not be the target for the ALF
POC. I recommend staying with ActiveBPEL for ALF
related work for the time being.
That all said, it
is a goal of ALF to be BPEL engine agnostic as far as is
practical. This is not the focus of the POC and thus any current ALF
work but it will be useful, going forward, to understand the various
engines out there.
Tim Buss From: alf-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:alf-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Hawkins, Joel Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2005 12:50 PM To: 'ALF Developer Mailing List' Subject: RE: [alf-dev] No Reasons for Agila "Primary Choice" +1
|