Ok, If I get your meaning you are after the ability to deploy a process and mark it as either "suspended" or not suspended (active). Basically the initial value of the flag that can be later controlled by the PMAPI suspend/resume method. To this I have no objection. -maciej
On Fri, 2006-08-18 at 10:45 -0600, Lance Waterman wrote: > This could be a misleading question in that I think this "autostart" > concept should remain ( for deploy and forget IL implementations ). > Therefore I am suggesting we add something into the DD that identifies > a process should auto start when the BpelServer is started. > > Lance > > On 8/18/06, Lance Waterman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > What about this concept of "process autostart" on > BpelServer.start()? Is this something you see going away from > a design standpoint? > > I'm trying to tease out the requirements from the "hacks". > > > Lance > > > On 8/18/06, Maciej Szefler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Lance, > > In this scheme, deploy() should only deploy. If the IL > wants to start > the deployment unit it should call start() after > calling deploy(). > There's a bunch of confusing logic in the code right > now about > auto-activation, stickiness, etc... Those are just > hacks and should not > be used as guidance. > > -maciej > > On Fri, 2006-08-18 at 10:16 -0600, Lance Waterman > wrote: > > Maciej, > > > > I would like to get a bit of clarification on this. > Does > > BpelServer.deploy(File) always imply a > > BpelServer.startDeploymentUnit(File) or should we > add an element into > > the DD that allows "start" on deployment to be > specified? > > > > Lance > > > >
