Ok, Ronald, there's some confussion here so I will summarize too. 1) My first suggestion: one task node, one task, pooled actors, no fork. 2) My second suggestion: one fork, two task nodes, one task each task-node. 3) Your (Alex's) suggestion: one task-node, two tasks, no fork.
I said there is little difference between 1) and 3). You said there is big difference between 2) and 3) I think we're both right, it's just that we were comparing different options :-) You correctly pointed out the advantages and disadvantages of 2) vs 3). I say the same advantages and disadvantages of 3) apply to 1). What I see is that either for 1) or 3), as both have only one task-node and therefore a common set of transitions, it is impossible to define at the processdefinition.xml which transitions are allowed to which actors, no matter if the task-node has one task or multiple tasks . So If I choose 1) or 3), I have to decide at the webapp level, without any help from jBPM, if I have to render a button for this transition for that actor. It's sad that this kind of information could not be available from the processdefinition.xml through the jBPM API, but again, maybe I'm missing the point. I don't know if jBPM 3.2 will help me either. With this in mind, now I find it easier to implement the 2) option (a fork, and killing the other task). View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3939766#3939766 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=3939766 ------------------------------------------------------- Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security? Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642 _______________________________________________ JBoss-user mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-user
