Alex, I don't think the following makes sense: On Tue, 2006-08-08 at 11:26 -0700, Alex Boisvert wrote: > New process definitions may "override" the initiating operations and > endpoints of retired process definitions to provide transparent > migration to existing service consumers. To prevent conflicts, > deploying a process definition using the same initiating operation(s) > and the same endpoint(s) of an already deployed process should fail. > Similarly, retired processes could be re-activated if no process > currently uses the same initiating operation(s) on the same endpoints.
A new process version, should--in fact I think it must--have the same initiating operations and endpoints. The new version of the process is deployed in the server on exactly the same endpoints as the old. The server manages the routing to make sure that the correct version of the process receives the correct messages. This can be done fairly easily and allows the "client" of the process to be completely oblivious to the fact that a new version has been deployed: the client keeps sending messages to the same BPEL engine endpoint. -mbs
