On Feb 9, 2009, at 11:41 AM, Luciano Resende wrote:
On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 12:11 AM, Martin Meyers
<martin.mey...@web.de> wrote:
Dear Luciano:
First of all, thank you for the first hints. Please, feel free to
read my comments/questions inline:
1. Is it actually possible to use other BPEL engines than "Apache
ODE" in SCA-BPEL component implementations?
Although currently we only support Apache ODE as a BPEL engine, we
can
easily extend Tuscany to support other BPEL engines, as long as it's
compatible with Apache license.
Which non-commercial BPEL engines would be the ones that definitely
are compatible with the Apache license?
I guess that this does not hold 100% for "ActiveBPEL", right?
The issue here is compatibility with Apache License... engines
licensed as GPL or LGPL would not be compatible.
JBPM would be ok. But, to make sure we are on the same page, we will
need to build a impplementation-bpel-jbpm module that would handle the
JBPM specific behaviour, and not just remove ODE and plug JBPM.
Software that is distributed by the Apache Tuscany project (or any ASF
project) can only include software that is compatible with the ASF's
software license policy. If anyone's interested in the details, here's
more info -- http://www.apache.org/legal/3party.html
Since ActiveBPEL is GPL, the Tuscany project could not include
ActiveBPEL in a Tuscany distribution. However, this does not
necessarily prevent someone from using ActiveBPEL within Tuscany. For
instance, an implementation-bpel-activebpel module could be developed
outside of the Tuscany project.
Also, there are options for allowing prohibitively licensed software
to work with an apache product -- http://www.apache.org/legal/3party.html#options
. I'm not saying that this can be accomplished for ActiveBPEL. Just
want to be sure we're thinking about this properly...
--kevan
