Do any one know from where i can find a comparison between Activiti & Joget open source BPMs ? containing advantages and disadvantages of each software compared to the other???
BR
Related
I stuck how to proceed further and need some new ideas to align these BPMN models which I have drawn for Customer Relationship Management(CRM) and Human Resources(HR).
As far as BPM model is considered it's mainly used for Business Architecture(BA) and then for Technical Architecture(TA) I could possibly use Rational Unified Process(RUP) but when I researched I could only find IBM Rational Rose Software which is not free...
My Question:-
Is there, open Source RUP tools which I can use? I looked up OpenUp but I could not make it work(which is a different issue).
Is this the right approach; for BA -> BPM and TA -> RUP ?
The scope of BPMN (BPMN specification 1. Scope ) describes
The primary goal of BPMN is to provide a notation that is readily understandable by all business users, from the business
analysts that create the initial drafts of the processes, to the technical developers responsible for implementing the
technology that will perform those processes, and finally, to the business people who will manage and monitor those
processes. Thus, BPMN creates a standardized bridge for the gap between the business process design and process
implementation.
There are Business process management(BPM) software's which provides process modeling and process execution conformance. Thus effectively making the models executable [at least to a certain depth].
In the free/ open source world you can find jBPM, Activiti etc...
I have tried out jBPM, is pretty much mature and has standard notations compliance. Also it supports modeling, execution and operational functionalities.
Traditional categorization of processes is talking about integration, human centric and document centric processes, with the last one as a good candidate for placing inside the DMS system (of course, the prerequisite is that there is a built-in support for BPM).
But I was unable to find some concrete,more detailed explanation of the distinction between those options.
Imagine a company, that have Enterprise BPM solution , and also a DMS system with quite good support for BPM (i.e. Filenet DMS).
In both systems you can create user screens and workflows (process logic) as well.
Also, most processes working with documents are also quite "human-centric".
I am perfectly aware of the fact, that choosing the target platform always depends on the requirements and specific circumstances, but I wonder, if there are some general rules, or principles, based on which I can better decide where to put the process layer of the whole solution.
Additional clarification:
I don't want to implement any new platform. As I indicated a little bit in the previous post, we already have BPM platform (Oracle) and DMS as well (Filenet with BPM support - Case Foundation). So the question is not about choosing the new platform...but more about setting the rules for using the existing products/platforms. There are a lot new projects in the queue...and for some of them (that are touching the area of working with documents) we need to decide the target platform/s. For example, when you have a simple process with a few steps, and in all steps there is some work with an existing document (the document - or at least his original version, is also input to this process), the requirements on the front-end are not very complicated etc...it would simpler to build the whole solution in the Filenet platform( mostly because of the cost). But I am wondering if there are some similar rules....Like you should think about that or that... when you want use only the DMS platform...or both platforms etc. You can call these rules the principles for development, references architectures or something like that....that is guiding you when designing the target architecture/s.
Thank you
I'm reposting the answer because I don't see a reason for deletion (by #Bohemian).
I think it adds value to anyone asking the same question. #Bohemian could have at least specified why he deleted the post.
Here it goes:
You gave us rather small amount of information. And what exactly is
the question? What do you mean by "where to put the process layer"?
You shouldn't constrain yourself to only those DM systems that claim
to have BPM built-in. That's marketing speak behind which often lay
two half-baked products. You should instead question which
standards-based integration points the system has, so you can
integrate effortlessly. And then invest in best-of-breed DM and best
BPM separately. All-in-one solutions are often too closed, difficult
to extend and above all, they bring free vendor-lock-in with them.
What are your business requirements, i.e. what do you have to do?
Implement BPM inside organization that already has DM or not? Do you
have some BPM platform already? Do you have any
constraints/requirements when choosing either of those (vendor,
technology foundation, Gartner quadrant...)?
What are the options you're considering for DM and which options are
you evaluating (if any) as a BPM platform? Have you already settled on
IBM or you can go elsewhere? Is open source an option?
What is your role/responsibility in this project?
EDIT - after the author's clarifications:
I have not worked with Oracle's BPM, but I can tell you that, although Case Foundation is more suited to Case Management, you can develop a complete Process Management solution with it (workflows, tasks, roles, deadlines, in-baskets, etc.).
If you go that path and later come across the business need to allow business users to define their own case templates, take a look at IBM Case Manager, as it builds on top of Case Foundation, but also brings additional WebUI features (built on IBM Content Navigator), suitable for business users (although, more often than not, it turns out the IT does that job).
A few IBM redbooks about Case & Content management that might help you make an informed decision:
Introducing IBM FileNet Business Process Manager - this is the former name for Case Foundation - the same product, new version.
Advanced Case Management with IBM Case Manager
Customizing and Extending IBM Content Navigator - you'll need this one for customizations, if you decide to go with CF (instead of Oracle).
Building IBM Enterprise Content Management Solutions From End to End - from ingestion to case/process management (contains Case Manager).
I agree with #Robert regarding integration, after all, before version 5.2 FileNet Content Platform Engine was FN Content Engine + FN Process Engine.
The word of advice I can give you is to first document all features that business requires from BPM. Then do a due diligence on both products, noting down which of those features each of those products supports. Then the answer, if not laid out in front of you, will at least be much easier.
You also have to take into account that IBM is oriented towards IBM BPM (former Lombardi) when process management is concerned. Former FN BPM is now more pushed into Case Management (but those two are very similar paradigms).
You should definitely post back about your experience, whichever option you choose.
Good "luck" :)
We're working on a ASP.NET MVC 4 project with Oracle DB (11g). Customer has asked us to add ad-hoc reports (OLAP) to our system, so we're looking at possible options. User interface should be integrated into existing ASP.NET MVC web-site and data source should be Oracle DB. What is the best available options for such configuration?
I guess this is rather late (being well over a year after the post!) but I would strongly recommend the OLAP option that is embedded into the 11g database.
Oracle have wrapped it in all sorts of crud and provided some not very good client tools (e.g. the OLAP worksheet) but the underlying engine, based on a tool originally called Express, has an extremely good pedigree and remains one of the best on the market. Performance is great, it has an excellent and fully-featured language and costs a fraction of Oracle's own Hyperion offering.
Best of all, it is embedded in the Oracle database allowing (relatively) easy transfer of data from one to the other (although they are still surprisingly much at arm's length, given how long the technology has been owned by Oracle).
Having had relatively limited success with the client tools provided by Oracle, we have tended to go back to basics and define/populate objects manually in the OLAP cube - although most of our applications tend to involve modelling/forecasting so require write-back, which is a strength of Oracle OLAP, but not well supported by the client tools as Oracle would rather you used the more expensive Hyperion.
we're looking for a GUI-based development tool for Activiti processes in order to reduce the formal development tasks associated with the XML configuration and Java support. Ideally we want to end up with any changes (config and functional) being GUI-driven so as to reduce the requisite skills for support. This leads me to believe we're after something like the functionality used in Oracle SOA Suite/Jdeveloper or Mule, whereby we can create the backend logic via the GUI and not have any re-development or code changes as such - the config will be done on a high-level via a designer using wizards or the like.
We have looked at the Activiti Eclipse plugin properties, and decomposing existing BPMN diagram files to their XML and modifying it manually, but this still requires generation of the service classes to support the process.
Does anybody have any experience with this type of requirement or any designer front-end for the process that uses wizards or dialogs for auto-generating the supporting backend?
Creating backend logic (this means Java) via GUI is not something activiti is intended for. You can create the diagram with several tools and this can be done for non-IT people. But you have to implement Service Tasks by yourself.
I have been already reading 4 erlang's open source system for 3 months, and they are rabbitmq, couchdb, gproc, jobs.
They are totally different from my previous c# system because there are many processes and not object-oriented.
It will be better to express these systems by design graphs(diagram) rather than just source code.
Could you tell me which design graph(diagram) and tools are better for this job?
If there are some samples URL link for processes design graph(diagram), it will be better.
for what I know a visual programming aid for Erlang has not been yet developed.
If you wanna use the graph abstraction to understand dependencies in your software you can use XRef Tool. This tool in conjuction with Erlang Digraph library can also visualize graphs of these dependencies, AFAIK.
Hope this helps!
Edit: This article refers to a methodology to create graphs for visualize processes, message passing and program flow in Erlang.
In the end, you can also use UML Sequence Diagram