我们目前正在评估 BPM 引擎，我非常感谢社区的意见。我正在做自己的尽职调查，但也想听听基于实施故事的建议。
我的主要评估标准如下：
- 开源和 OEM 友好的许可证
- 生产安装（成功案例很有帮助）
- 商业支持 可用的
- 开放标准支持 -
- 基于输入
- 嵌入的
BPMN 动态创建/组装工作流程目前我正在评估 Activiti 和 JBPM。 Bonita 开放式 BPM 似乎也是一个不错的候选者，但从未使用过它。你们在 Bonita 上有成功的部署吗？
We are currently in the process of evaluating a BPM engine and I'd really appreciate the community input. I am doing my own due diligence but would also like to hear on the suggestion based on implementation stories.
My main evaluation criteria are below
- open source and OEM friendly license
- production installations (success stories are a great help)
- commercial support available
- open standards support - BPMN
- dynamic creation/assembly of the workflow based on input
- embeddable
Currently I am evaluating Activiti and JBPM. Bonita open BPM seems like a good candidate as well but never used it. Do you guys have any successful deployments on Bonita?
发布评论
评论（3）
我刚刚对 Activiti 与 jBPM 进行了评估。
事实上，这两种解决方案之间似乎差别很小。
我们对 jBPM 的标准之一是与 Guvnor 的交互，当我下载并运行 jBPM 的演示安装（2011 年 3 月 28 日）时，似乎仍然存在一些主要错误（GUVNOR-1274），因此在选择采用此解决方案之前，我个人会进行更多测试。
事实上，我们将推荐上述两种解决方案之一，但我们还不确定是哪一种，我们将在今年晚些时候更仔细地研究它。
I've just been doing an evaluation of Activiti vs jBPM.
In fact there seems to be very little between the two solutions.
One of our criteria for jBPM was the interaction with Guvnor, and when I downloaded and ran the demo install for jBPM (28/03/2011) and there still seemed to be some major bugs (GUVNOR-1274), so I personally would test a lot more before I chose to pursue this solution.
In fact, we will be recommending one of the above two solutions, but we're not sure which yet, we'll look at it more closely later this year.
尽管我几乎没有实践经验，但我最近确实对 Java BPM 选项进行了研究。我将其范围缩小到 3：
Drools 社区似乎更活跃，工具更好，规则引擎非常复杂（因为这是 drools 的基础），但周围的业务流程是集成良好。然而，jBPM 更关注业务流程并且也很灵活。它们都由 JBoss 管理
Drools 和 JBPM 之间的进一步比较可以在这里找到：
Drools v jBPM
如果您有一个充满信心的开发团队并且需求不是太复杂，那么总是值得考虑推出自己的开发团队。 BPM 可能会导致域模型贫乏（如这篇文章规则引擎的优点和缺点中所述）关于规则引擎）当您尝试采用域模型来适应此类系统时，为您的业务定制的精心构建的系统总是会更加有效。
就您的标准而言：
开源和 OEM 友好许可证 - Drools 使用自由的“ASL/BSD/MIT 式许可证”，社区很活跃。 jBPM 使用 apache、eclipse 和 MIT 许可证
生产安装。我知道许多保险公司和信用检查机构都使用 drools，不确定 jBPM
商业支持是否可用于
开放标准支持 - BPMN - 两者都实现 BPMN，并且由于其性质的开源项目非常以标准为导向。
基于输入动态创建/组装工作流程。虽然两者通常都很容易手动实现。
可嵌入 - 两者都提供完整的系统，但经过调制，因此应该适合嵌入到现有系统中。
Although I have little practical experience I did undertake a research spike into java BPM options recently. I narrowed it down to 3:
The Drools community seems more active, tools are better, the rules engine was very sophisticated (as this was the base of drools) but surrounding business process were well integrated. However jBPM was more focused around business processes and slick as well. They are both managed by JBoss
Further comparisons between Drools and JBPM can be found here:
Drools v jBPM
If you have a confident development team and the requirements aren't too complex it is always worth considering rolling your own. BPMs can lead to anaemic domain models (as described in this post Rules Engine pros and cons about rules engines ) as you try adopt your domain models to fit into such systems, also well built systems customised for your business are always going to be more effective.
As far as your criteria goes:
Open-Source and OEM friendly license - Drools uses a liberal 'ASL/BSD/MIT-esque license', community is active. jBPM uses apache, eclipse and MIT licenses
Production Installations. I understand drools is used by many insurance companies and credit checkers, not sure a jBPM
Commercial Support available for both
Open Standards Support - BPMN - Both implement BPMN and due to the nature of the open source projects are very standards orientated.
Dynamic Creation/Assembly of the Workflow based on input. Both, although is generally easily implemented manually.
Eembeddable - both offer entire systems but are modulated so this should suite embedding into existing systems.
我不使用 MS 堆栈吗？ WWF 4.0为引擎，可重新托管设计器。 WCF 用于通信。用于 BI 的 MS Sql Server。有大量 .NET 开发人员可以帮助构建和定制。除了 Windows 目标之外，不依赖于外部供应商。
My not use an MS stack? WWF 4.0 for the engine, re-hostable designer. WCF for communication. MS Sql Server for BI. Plenty of .NET devs out there to help build and customise. Other than a Windows target, no dependency on an external supplier.