nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

As we transition to the new Hyland Community, some post links may be temporarily disrupted as we finalize redirects. We apologize for the inconvenience and are working to resolve this as quickly as possible. Details.

PVM status

payne

Hi,

these days we have to made decision between jBPM 5 and Activiti and Activiti is currently a winner, however we need to be sure about the state and future direction with PVM.

So what is the current state? In Documentation there is the PVM part tagged as "Experimental". So is there a date where it will have stable API?

Sorry for dumb question, but we really need to make good longterm decision…

Thanks,
Martin Skurla

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

trademak

Hi Martin,

Are you implementing your own process language (an other one than BPMN 2.0) on top of the PVM?
When you just want to use the Activiti Engine to run BPMN 2.0 processes there is nothing "experimental".

Best regards,

j_p_ryan

I am also in the Avtiviti v jBPM decision phase. Would be interested to hear the key reasons why you put Activiti at the top.

trademak

Hi,

The decision to choose between jBPM and Activiti depends a lot on your specific needs and your own personal opinion.
Reasons to choose for Activiti could be:

- Clean and simple-to-use API
- Native Spring integration
- Mule and Camel integration
- Toolsuite includes Probe, Explorer, Kickstart, Modeler and Designer. And there's a great new version of Probe and Explorer in one application coming in the next release in August.

And because the framework is designed by Tom and Joram you can be sure it's rock solid and based on years of experience building process engines.

Best regards,