The workflow patterns and open source WFMS

104 views
Skip to first unread message

petia

unread,
Aug 8, 2008, 7:04:37 AM8/8/08
to Workflow Patterns Group
Dear all,

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.

The results are documented in a report which is available from
http://eprints.qut.edu.au/archive/00014320/

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.

Enjoy the reading!

Kind regards, Petia

John Mettraux

unread,
Aug 8, 2008, 8:57:43 AM8/8/08
to workflow...@googlegroups.com
On Fri, Aug 8, 2008 at 8:04 PM, petia <petia...@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.
>
> The results are documented in a report which is available from
> http://eprints.qut.edu.au/archive/00014320/


Congrats Petia ! Thanks for all this work,

--
John Mettraux - http://jmettraux.wordpress.com

mastermark

unread,
Aug 21, 2008, 4:37:49 AM8/21/08
to Workflow Patterns Group
Interesting report. Very nice work -- thanks!

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...

mastermark

unread,
Aug 21, 2008, 4:39:07 AM8/21/08
to Workflow Patterns Group
And a second question: any plans to do a follow on study that takes a
look at beasts like Intalio?

John Mettraux

unread,
Aug 21, 2008, 4:52:42 AM8/21/08
to workflow...@googlegroups.com
On Thu, Aug 21, 2008 at 5:37 PM, mastermark <m.mas...@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).

I started doing my homework about the patterns and OpenWFEru at :
http://openwferu.rubyforge.org/patterns.html

Had no time to finish yet and I'm looking forward to see Petia's book
as it will bring a fresh perspective on the exercise.

Basically the Ruby version would fare as the Java version did.


Best regards,

petia

unread,
Aug 21, 2008, 7:53:52 AM8/21/08
to Workflow Patterns Group
Hi Mark,

Welcome to the group!

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:
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages