[Zope3-dev] Workflow

[Ulrich Eck]

Hi Flow'ers

> I don't mean to unify them, since they don't compete, so there is nothing
> to unify. :-)

good .. let's agree that we won't try to unify awf/ewf ..

Do we need to have both techniques implemented in Zope3?
---------------
 required
 wanted
 optional +1
 not wanted
---------------

Which Implementation is more important?
---------------
 Activity-Based Workflow +1
 Entity-Based Workflow
---------------

Please vote, that we can concentrate on things we really need
for rotterdam-sprint.

Depending on this we need to agree on:

1. Terms we use:
   Many different sayings/terms are still used,
   We need to find a common language to be able
   to communicate.

2. Interfaces we use/require:
   Depending on the voting above we need to specify
   a minimal set of interfaces + interfaces per implementation
   or a complete set of interfaces for one implementation

3. How do we specify a process (ProcessDefinition):
   what is needed, what is optional:
   where are Processdefinitions stored: ZODB/Filesystem/RDB/LDAP ?
   how detailed are processed defined, what capabilities will be provided ?
   (-->workflow patterns)
   will we be compatible with XPDL and/or other standards ?

4. Implemetation-Details:
   what is needed, what is optional:
   wich capabilities are needed: Sequence/Parallel Split/Synchronisation/
   Exclusive Choice/Simple Merge/+?
   is the workflow-engine request-based only (or will it have some 
"heartbeat"
   to detect e.g. timeouts/deadlines)
   many more :) .. just wanted to start with something

>> On the other side it would be an unwanted overhead to assign each
>> contentobject a
>> PI like described above .. so i'ld like to see/build a system where both
>> concepts
>> can live nearby without trying to cripple both concepts just to unify
>> the access.
>
> I did not say that process instances would be assigned to content objects
> nor the other way around.  I said this last year, but that's not what I'm
> saying anymore.  The workflow engine would make decisions like this.

ok

>> Try to convince me if i'm wrong .. Detailed information about how you
>> would build
>> your diagram object would help understanding your vision better.
>
> I originally came up with "diagram objects" but have since retracted that
> idea.  "Process definition" is the better description.

yup


cheers


Ulrich Eck
------------------------------------------------------------------------
net-labs Systemhaus GmbH
Ebersberger Str. 46
85570 Markt Schwaben
fon:   +49-8121-4747-11
fax:   +49-8121-4747-77
email: ueck@net-labs.de
http://www.net-labs.de