John,
I've decided to keep trying. I'll learn more and write more tests and try to use Ruote in our environment. The doubts still with me, but I absolutely agree you that there are no read-to-wear questions. p.s. Sorry for poor English. Best regards, Oleg On 24 мар, 13:04, John Mettraux <[email protected]> wrote: > 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.
