Rania,
Do you have any recommendation on how we
could create an open environment where we could collaboratively run stuff?
We have a BPEL playground outside a
firewall (http://bpel.collaxa.com/BPELConsole)
where sample BPEL processes can be deployed and tested. Do you happen to have
an instance of BPWS4J accessible on the net and where we could try some basic
interaction samples?
Edwin
From: Diane Jordan
[mailto:]
Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2004
1:09 PM
To: bpel implementation
Subject: Fw: [wsbpel-implement]
Portability and Interoperability Testing
message from Rania below...
Regards, Diane
IBM Dynamic e-business Technologies
(919)254-7221 or 8-444-7221, Mobile:
919-624-5123
----- Forwarded by Diane
Jordan/Raleigh/IBM on 02/17/2004 04:08 PM -----
Rania Khalaf/Watson/IBM
02/17/2004 01:36 PM
Please
respond to
rkhalaf
To
Diane Jordan/Raleigh/IBM@IBMUS
cc
Subject
Re: Fw: [wsbpel-implement] Portability and
Interoperability TestingLink
Hi Diane,
I
was trying to post the following on the oasis list, but something's wrong with
the smtp server so i couldn't.
Can
it please get posted somehow ? This e-mail address is not the one I use in the
TC so I can't post from here.
---------------------------
Hi
everyone,
Ron,
thanks for kicking things up around here again :)
First
some background: We started out wanting to do some initial interop/portability
trials by excercising parts of the
spec,
starting with ones that we all are on the same page on, and moving
to
ones that are more closely related to the issues. This is what led to
the
initial set of scenarios that we put up last year. We want to actually
run stuff, and for that we have a starting set of scenarios ready to run
and taken mainly from the spec itself. The setup is to be informal, with an
open forum on how things should run/how they actually ran on the
different engines being experimented with.
I
think this is the right level for this stage in BPEL's life (although
it
would help if people would come forward with engines to actually move
forward).
It helps us share/run interacting BPELs, clarify issues being
discussed
on the main list, and addresses any ambiguities that may come
up
during execution that we can clarify in the updated specification.
A
full testing/compliance suite would be desirable for BPEL; however,
this
is not the right time for it and it's not in the scope of the TC
(building
compliance tools). Perhaps something could go on in parallel,
maybe
in the WS-I, after the spec is finalized and released so that
people
refer to a full version. I am strongly against doing this here.
Sadly,
we didn't even get enough people to join to do the above, simple, test
scenarios and start up the basic discussions that would lead to an
understanding
of what it would take to have portability/interop in BPEL.
I
would just like to see people moving away from bullet lists and
wanting
to draw up more examples and discussing how things *should* run,
to
actually openly and collaboratively running stuff, talking about the
results,
the assumptions, the assumptions proved wrong. This is where we
want
to go, and this is the right forum to do it in.
Rania
-----------------------------------------------
Rania Y. Khalaf
Software Engineer
Component Systems Group
IBM TJ Watson Research Center
Hawthorne, NY
Tel: (914) 784-7603
http://www.research.ibm.com/people/r/rkhalaf/
Diane Jordan
02/13/2004 04:19 PM
To: Frank
Leymann/Germany/IBM@IBMDE, Dieter Roller/Germany/IBM@IBMDE, Dieter
Koenig1/Germany/IBM@IBMDE, Francisco Curbera/Watson/IBM, Rania
Khalaf/Watson/IBM, Fabienne Marquardt/Germany/IBM@IBMDE, Stephen A
White/Irvine/IBM
cc:
Subject: Fw:
[wsbpel-implement] Portability and Interoperability Testing
fyi - at last some activity on implementations. I
guess Sun has their code ready.
I
don't think validation tools or certification are in scope for TC though.
I'll
respond on the list that I'm glad to see renewed interest and point to the call
that's planned for Mar. 1.
Feel
free to comment on the list if you wish.
Regards, Diane
IBM Dynamic e-business Technologies
(919)254-7221 or 8-444-7221, Mobile:
919-624-5123
----- Forwarded by Diane
Jordan/Raleigh/IBM on 02/13/2004 04:16 PM -----
"Kristofer Agren"
<>
02/13/2004 02:01 PM
To
"'Ron Ten-Hove'"
<>, "'bpel implementation'"
<>
cc
Subject
RE: [wsbpel-implement] Portability and
Interoperability Testing
I agree that this needs to happen in order for
BPEL to gain acceptance in
the industry. Here are some of objectives that
spring to mind:
1. Provide the tools for implementers to validate
their implementations,
this could include:
1.1. Defining a set of BPEL processes/use cases
that will collectively cover
the functionality of the entire BPEL
specification. These test cases should
be delivered in conjunction with new the release
of new BPEL specifications.
1.2. Define the expected results when running the
BPEL processes above,
which could be done by either supplying the
message contents that are
involved and their flow, or providing actual
implementations on a central
site so that the test processes can be run with
different input.
1.3. Either providing a set of WSDL definitions
for the web services that
will take part, or even better, provide actual
implementations at a central
site so that there will be no misinterpretations
when implementing the web
services involved in the business process.
2. Provide some ways for, for lack of a better
work, certification. This of
course implies that some independent entity is
available to do the
certification. While certification is a huge
effort by itself, without it,
there will be no way to tell if a given implementation
is in fact compliant.
3. Interoperability. This would imply cooperation
on behalf of all, or a
large majority of, BPEL implementers. How do we
get implementers to ensure
portability amongst themselves?
Regards,
Kristofer
-----Original Message-----
From: Ron Ten-Hove
[mailto:]
Sent: Friday, February 13, 2004 1:38 PM
To: bpel implementation
Subject: [wsbpel-implement] Portability and
Interoperability Testing
BPEL implementors:
I've been giving some thought lately
to the issues of testing or
demonstrating compliance to the WS-BPEL
specification. As we have
discussed in the past this really falls into two
categories: portability
and interoperability.
Historically there have been several
approaches to testing such
compliance. Our situation is complicated by
dependencies on
implementation-specific messaging infrastructure,
so we have some other
issues to deal with before we get to the main
event. What approaches do
you, the implementors of BPEL, see as the most likely
to demonstrate
BPEL compliance, portability, and (reasonable)
interoperability? Should
we start trying to spin up an effort (perhaps
external) to do this?
I believe that doing nothing in this
domain will do a lot of harm to
BPEL. Are we at the right stage in BPEL's life to
worry about this? Or
has someone started addressing this issue already?
Cheers,
-Ron
