2010/3/24 Olle <[email protected]>: > > Thanks for response. My Ruote version was 2.1.8. After I did "gem > update" everything works fine, thank you! By the way, could Ruote work > with Ruby 1.9?
Hello Olle, yes, ruote works on Ruby 1.9.1p378. I want to start exploring 1.9.2 soon. And if it didn't work, it's just a bug fix away. > John, our team looking for replacement of currently used workflow > engine, which is proprietary and poor-designed. > After reading some about Ruote, I extremely like design and idea of > that and really want to go on with it. It seems you put much effort on > developing Ruote. May be we'll able to return some code or ideas to > the project, because we have good experience of developing real-life > BPs. Thanks in advance. > But since your answer, there are some doubts for me. Could you please > give me your opinion. May be someone from "ruote on windows mini- > community" )) could help me to find the answers... > > 1. Can Ruote be stable on Windows? (we have some requirements about > using COM, ActiveX ans so on...) As I have said, that depends on the community. The core developers are not using Windows. We believe in "unix on the server, firefox/safari/chrome on the client". Developing on Windows is such a pain. Incentives to develop for Windows are almost nonexistent. I've been doing it out of kindness for now. The "ruote on windows mini-community" will exist as soon as someone will switch from saying "it doesn't work" to "it didn't work and that's how I fixed it, here's the patch". > 2. Is it suitable/anybody used it for handling many complex processes > with hundreds of steps and subprocesses? Yes and no. Yes, people do/did heavy stuff with ruote. No, I have no ideas of your requirements. Ruote is placing an accent on robustness, performance comes second. The power of the process definition language comes at a price too. Then Ruby is not the fastest language around. Then there are the configuration choices, storage, operating system, machine, ... And then how smart is your implementation (balance between business processes and more classical services) Your test benches can answer that question better than I can. I think that hundreds of steps/subprocesses is not sound, whatever the workflow system. Less complex businesses/systems perform better and are easier to adapt. Sorry, no ready-to-wear answers. Best regards, -- John Mettraux - http://jmettraux.wordpress.com -- you received this message because you are subscribed to the "ruote users" group. to post : send email to [email protected] to unsubscribe : send email to [email protected] more options : http://groups.google.com/group/openwferu-users?hl=en To unsubscribe from this group, send email to openwferu-users+unsubscribegooglegroups.com or reply to this email with the words "REMOVE ME" as the subject.
