On Sat, Nov 23, 2013 at 02:01:06PM -0500, David Bock wrote: > > Don't take offense at my word, none was intended. He wrote a blog entry > several years ago illustrating why he thought state machines were not > workflow, clearly denigrating the approach.
Hello, here is what David is referring to, plus some extra: * http://blog.engineyard.com/2011/ruote-and-flow * http://jmettraux.wordpress.com/2009/07/03/state-machine-workflow-engine/ * http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2353564/use-cases-of-the-workflow-engine David, please remember that, in your presentations, you use business process management tools and workflow engines as the ugly things Stonepath is supposed to save the world from. To bring back the thread in the line set by the OP, I'd say, Stonepath is not an alternative to ruote, because Stonepath is a methodology while ruote is a workflow engine. Kind regards, -- John Mettraux - http://lambda.io/jmettraux -- -- 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 --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "ruote" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
