Page History
...
- Using jBPM User Tasks
- PRO
- would be the "proper" way to implement manual tasks in jBPM (we currently fake them with a Service Task, that is a task usually performed by an automated system, which sends a message to Pulse)
- we'd take advantage of all the properties already available there, such as groupId, actorId, comment, etc., no need to reinvent the wheel
- CONTRA
- no clear documentation on how to integrate it - one is basically left with the source code only. TODO verify that this claim is actually true
- what about tasks independent of a workflow engine presence?
- how to make the workflow engine aware of Magnolia groups and users?
- PRO
- Extending the Message class into a generic Task
- PRO
- would handle any type of task, regardless of a workflow engine presence
- easier to persist and query, most of the job already being done by the MessageStore API
- CONTRA
- would make our workflow solution still rely on our "fake" UserTask
- would make our workflow solution still rely on our "fake" UserTask
- PRO
A basic sequence diagram showing how Workflow and Pulse can collaborate.
A sequence diagram showing showing a TaskManager between Workflow and Pulse
Overview
Content Tools