I just wanted to inform you that the workflow patterns have now been
used for the evaluation of three open source workflow management
systems: jBPM, OpenWFE and Enhydra Shark.
This document is a revision and extension of the BPM center report
(http://is.tm.tue.nl/staff/wvdaalst/BPMcenter/reports/2007/ BPM-07-12.pdf). For those of you, familiar with the earlier report,
the technical evaluations has not changed. In the latest version we
have extended the outlook and improved the presentation.
On Fri, Aug 8, 2008 at 8:04 PM, petia <petia.wo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I just wanted to inform you that the workflow patterns have now been > used for the evaluation of three open source workflow management > systems: jBPM, OpenWFE and Enhydra Shark.
A question: does anybody have a feel for how the evaluation of OpenWFE
might have looked if Ruote (the Ruby implementation) had been used as
a comparison? I understand the answer to that is "Not in detail, no"
-- otherwise, it would have been in the report. ;) I'm after more of
a gut feeling, finger in the air sort of an answer...
On Thu, Aug 21, 2008 at 5:37 PM, mastermark <m.master...@computer.org> wrote:
> A question: does anybody have a feel for how the evaluation of OpenWFE > might have looked if Ruote (the Ruby implementation) had been used as > a comparison? I understand the answer to that is "Not in detail, no" > -- otherwise, it would have been in the report. ;) I'm after more of > a gut feeling, finger in the air sort of an answer...
Hello Mark,
Petia is currently working on a textbook for their group, IIRC it will detail patterns implemented with YAWL, jBPM and OpenWFEru (Ruote).
A small clarification to John's comment. The book chapter I am working
on will not really go through how Ruote (OpenWFEru) or jBPM solve the
patterns. It will just shortly introduce these tools. When working
with the new version of OpenWFE (the Ruby implementation) for this
chapter, I got a positive impression of the tool (as I did when
working with its Java version). One main difference of OpenWFE
compared to many other workflow management systems is that OpenWFE is
text-oriented. I know that John is working on a graphical editor for
it, but for the moment the language is textual.
About your second question, whether we are planning to do some follow
up and analyse offerings such as Intalio's. I was actually approached
by Intalio with the same question. Unfortunately, due to resource
limitations we are currently not planning to carry out an analysis of
Intalio's offering.
Regards, Petia
On 21 Aug, 10:52, "John Mettraux" <jmettr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 21, 2008 at 5:37 PM, mastermark <m.master...@computer.org> wrote:
> > A question: does anybody have a feel for how the evaluation of OpenWFE
> > might have looked if Ruote (the Ruby implementation) had been used as
> > a comparison? I understand the answer to that is "Not in detail, no"
> > -- otherwise, it would have been in the report. ;) I'm after more of
> > a gut feeling, finger in the air sort of an answer...
> Hello Mark,
> Petia is currently working on a textbook for their group, IIRC it will
> detail patterns implemented with YAWL, jBPM and OpenWFEru (Ruote).
