[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-1542?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12520473
]
gengshaoguang commented on TUSCANY-1542:
----------------------------------------
Hi, I am not really confident absolutly.
So, I may need to discuss this with you here.
For my second point(BPEL-SCA), I understood the SPEC. as BPEL need to have a
extension (just as ibm's BPEL extension for people). But do you think these
extension should be a responsibility of the BPEL engine?
One thing I'm sure is we need to embedded a BPEL engin in Tuscany. But without
changes, the engine will not know these entension(SCA).
My suggestion is this extension should be much delicate that it is independent
to Tuscany, in these case, I might be used not only in ODE, but also others
like ActiveBPEL.
Best Regart
> BPEL extension to link sca component into a business process
> ------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: TUSCANY-1542
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-1542
> Project: Tuscany
> Issue Type: Wish
> Components: Java SCA BPEL Implementation Extension
> Affects Versions: Java-SCA-Next
> Reporter: gengshaoguang
> Fix For: Java-SCA-Next
>
>
> What I expect next is: extend a bpel engine, make it interact with Tuscany's
> sca binding. Of course any bpel engine might link wsdl naturaly. But in the
> latter case, we make no improvement to SOA tech. BPEL->SCA should work in a
> more direct way and more effect way. I think
> SCA_ClinetAndImplementationModelforBPEL_V100 has specified relevants at
> section 1.4 .
> I open this issue to arouse collaboration from all of you.
> Thanks.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
