Great stuff Ismael!
James
On 15 Feb 2006, at 22:07, Ismael Ghalimi wrote:
Good afternoon,
My name is Ismael Ghalimi, and I am the CEO of Intalio. Our company
would be
interested in participating to the Ode project through a donation
of the PXE
BPEL 2.0 engine and the dedication of
I'm really glad to finally see a consensus emerging!
Matthieu.
Bill, It seems everybody has exhibited a willingness to work
togetherI agree. And since we've just gotten off the phone, I'll pass
along thatyou have expressed not only a willingness, but a strong
preference that bothyour group and
I'm not sure it's consensus - more a case of folks getting fed up
with the petty arguing and just want to get things done.
On 16 Feb 2006, at 08:54, Matthieu Riou wrote:
I'm really glad to finally see a consensus emerging!
Matthieu.
Bill, It seems everybody has exhibited a willingness to
On Wed, Feb 15, 2006 at 08:38:13AM -0800, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
On 2/14/06, Leo Simons [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This whole how do we do URLs for an xdocs website stuff is interesting. We
were used to the forrest way of doing things (aka being really intelligent
about it), and now we have
Thanks!
On 2/16/06, James Strachan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Great stuff Ismael!
James
On 15 Feb 2006, at 22:07, Ismael Ghalimi wrote:
Good afternoon,
My name is Ismael Ghalimi, and I am the CEO of Intalio. Our company
would be
interested in participating to the Ode project
Alan,
Thanks for doing this. It looks good.
One comment: in the Homogeneous developers section, we might want to make
mention of Intalio alongside Sybase in order to re-enforce the group's
heterogeneity.
Best regards
-Ismael
On 2/15/06, Alan D. Cabrera [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Done. Feel
Yes, we appear to be to a point where we can move the Ode project forward on
its own merit if the vote supports it and at that point get to an objective
criteria for determining how to work out the internal details. I'm
specifically avoiding judgements about the merit of any overlapping
Bill and Ismael,
Do be clear, as I understand it from comments such as:
Ismael: Intalio [working] alongside Sybase
Bill Flood: My preference is simply that we apply our
combined talent to work towards something
greater than the sum of the parts.
and from a
Noel,
We are in favor of a single project, for it will lead to the best
implementation we can get with the resources that are being dedicated to the
project.
The meaning of the Ode (ODE?) acronym seems a little bit confusing and might
have to be clarified. The name itself is nice though.
Our
If i may+1 to ode. let's get this rolling with ode-dev@
thanks,
-- dims
On 2/16/06, Noel J. Bergman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Bill and Ismael,
Do be clear, as I understand it from comments such as:
Ismael: Intalio [working] alongside Sybase
Bill Flood: My preference is simply that
Could I presume to suggest something as obvious as Apache BPEL or
similar? makes it easier for people to grok what we're doing. I know
it's not terribly imaginative, but might make it easy for people to
recognize it as a BPEL project. (Like ActiveBPEL)
geir
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
Bill
On 16 Feb 2006, at 16:41, Ismael Ghalimi wrote:
[snip]
Our primary concern moving forward will be whether we start from one
codebase, or try to merge two existing codebases.
From a purely practical perspective, its probably easiest to start
off with the 2 codebases imported (when the IP
Welcome aboard!
Regards,
Alan
Paul Fremantle wrote, On 2/16/2006 9:28 AM:
Alan
I'm also keen to join in. I'm very positive about ODE and I'm looking
forward to it.
Paul
On 2/14/06, Bill Flood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Alan, I would like to throw my name in the hat and become actively
On 2/16/06, Paul Fremantle [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm also keen to join in. I'm very positive about ODE and I'm looking
forward to it.
How can a member of the community at large participate in the process?
(I'm relatively familiar with BPEL and with the PXE codebase...)
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
I agree, we'll need to set both codebases in the repository so we can
start the merge process.
In parallel, we also need to determine what we want from the resulting
merge so we can work together in building the new engine.
alex
James Strachan wrote:
On 16 Feb 2006, at 16:41, Ismael Ghalimi
This raises an interesting point. Is the goal of the project to produce
a BPEL engine? If so, then we could have separation between BPEL
(processes) and workflow (human tasks). I think this would help
modularity and clarify project focus.
In order words, workflow-related pieces could go
You kidding me? Please join us. relatively familiar with BPEL and
with the PXE codebase is the understatment of the year.
-- dims
On 2/16/06, Paul Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 2/16/06, Paul Fremantle [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm also keen to join in. I'm very positive about ODE and
It would seem better to think of the (human) workflow in a different scope
as we disect the problem. There are all kinds of issues in Workflow with
forms, etc. that have little to do with the actual orchestration or even
BPEL. Brings to mind MVC.
It might make sense to divide the problem space
+1 for importing the codebase into 2 subdirectories to start with.
However, if we want to merge the two into one, then let's make it a goal
that we don't release anything until we've figured out how to cut-n-chop
mix-n-match to make that real. Its clearly not going to be easy and
will take some
On Feb 16, 2006, at 10:08 AM, Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
Could I presume to suggest something as obvious as Apache BPEL or
similar? makes it easier for people to grok what we're doing. I
know it's not terribly imaginative, but might make it easy for
people to recognize it as a BPEL
Though Apache SOAP was a bit before my time...i agree :)
On 2/16/06, Roy T. Fielding [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Feb 16, 2006, at 10:08 AM, Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
Could I presume to suggest something as obvious as Apache BPEL or
similar? makes it easier for people to grok what we're
Alright, then I would revise my proposition to:
Apache Ode = Merge of PXE, Sybase BPE and Agila BPEL
Apache Agila = Merge of Agila workflow and Intalio BPEL4People
What do people think about this grouping?
alex
Roy T. Fielding wrote:
On Feb 16, 2006, at 10:08 AM, Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
A BPEL engine is integrated within JBI using a JBI component.
In such a case, the BPEL engine should only communicate
with the JBI bus (excluding direct http calls or whatever else).
The JBI container is really a container which communicates
with a component using a set of specified interfaces,
On 16 Feb 2006, at 23:44, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
James,
I'm afraid I'm not as familiar with JBI as I probably should be
(which is
to say not at all). Would leveraging JBI to do Ode's heavy lifting
introduce a dependency on ServiceMix and/or JBI into Ode, or is it
merely a
Java-based
24 matches
Mail list logo
