Bug 796158

Summary:	All jBPM libraries are contained in Drools engine
Product:	[JBoss] JBoss Enterprise BRMS Platform 5	Reporter:	Tomas Schlosser <tschloss>
Component:	Build Process	Assignee:	Julian Coleman <jcoleman>
Status:	VERIFIED ---	QA Contact:	Lukáš Petrovický <lpetrovi>
Severity:	high	Docs Contact:
Priority:	unspecified
Version:	BRMS 5.3.0.GA	CC:	atangrin, kverlaen, lpetrovi
Target Milestone:	---
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	Unspecified
OS:	Unspecified
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:		Doc Type:	Bug Fix
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:		Type:	---
Regression:	---	Mount Type:	---
Documentation:	---	CRM:
Verified Versions:		Category:	---
oVirt Team:	---	RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team:	---	Target Upstream Version:

Description Tomas Schlosser 2012-02-22 12:10:38 UTC

Description of problem:
Since it was agreed that Drools and jBPM should be distributed in different zip, there should not be all jBPM jars in Drools distribution.

The discussion about what jars should be kept in Drools and what should be removed is welcomed.

From my point of view the jbpm-flow nad jbpm-flow-builder should stay there as they provide *.rf support.
Furthermore the jbpm-persistence-jpa should stay as well since it would not be possible to persist sessions otherwise.
The rest should be removed and distributed in jboss-jbpm-engine.zip

Comment 1 Kris Verlaenen 2012-03-27 16:07:35 UTC

You would also need the jbpm-bpmn2 module to support the RuleFlow compilation (using the .bpmn2 format rather than the depricated .rf format).

Comment 2 Lukáš Petrovický 2012-03-27 16:15:17 UTC

(In reply to comment #1)
> You would also need the jbpm-bpmn2 module to support the RuleFlow compilation
> (using the .bpmn2 format rather than the depricated .rf format).

I believe that this was an intentional decision to only have the Drools package handle RF and have the user go to jBPM binaries when BPMN2 is requested. Otherwise, I really see no reason for having the two packages separate.

(I'm not even arguing that they *should* be separate. It's just what the group decision ended up being.)

Comment 4 Julian Coleman 2012-09-03 16:25:18 UTC

Resolved with revision 11415 of:

  brms-p/src/main/assembly/brms-engine.zip.xml

Commit message:
  BZ-796158
  Put only the jbpm-flow* and jbpm-persistence-jpa* jars in the BRMS engine zip.

Comment 5 Tomas Schlosser 2012-09-17 12:22:59 UTC

BRMS-5.3.1-ER1 jboss-brms-engine.zip contains only appropriate libraries. Marking as verified.