dwoodbury (10) [Avatar] Offline
#1
I like the approach the book takes with Activiti, Bonita, and jBPM comparison. Recently, I've come across Intalio and ProcessMaker as other open-source BPMS solutions. I wonder, are these in your radar and if so your thoughts.
tijs.rademakers (494) [Avatar] Offline
#2
Re: Open-Source BPMS Comparison
Hi,

Intalio doesn't have a BPMN engine but a BPEL engine. So that's one reason for leaving it out of the comparison. As I believe BPMN is really the way forward to implement business processes, Intalio would be out of my list. ProcessMaker takes a more workflow oriented approach and also doesn't adhere to the BPMN 2.0 specification. To my findings ProcessMaker is a proprietary approach to building workflow processes.

Best regards,

Tijs
dwoodbury (10) [Avatar] Offline
#3
Re: Open-Source BPMS Comparison
Thanks for the quick reply. I've spent time with many legacy BPMS' this past year, and it does seem that the pure BPMN approach is cleaner than the BPMN-XPDL-BPEL approach.

I've read some criticism of pure BPMN in that there is no clear standard for human tasks like WS-HumanTask and therefore interchange between BPMN2.0 engines will be constrained. On the other hand, for the BPMS' that I reviewed, there were so many vendor customizations that I found it hard to see how migration could be accomplished with any tool without significant effort.
alexs (1) [Avatar] Offline
#4
Re: Open-Source BPMS Comparison
Hi Tijs,

ProcessMaker is certainly not proprietary. It's an open source BPMS, and the full BPMN 2.0 compatibility is in ProcessMaker 3.0 roadmap:
http://wiki.processmaker.com/index.php/ProcessMaker_RoadMap

Best regards,

Alex Saavedra

Message was edited by:
alexs
tijs.rademakers (494) [Avatar] Offline
#5
Re: Open-Source BPMS Comparison
Hi Alex,

Proprietary doesn't conflict with open source. I also saw that ProcessMaker had BPMN 2.0 compatibility on its roadmap. But the current state of the designer is really not BPMN 2.0 compliant. I can see that some parts of BPMN 2.0 are implemented, but there's just too much missing. For example, I couldn't find a way to export the process diagram as BPMN 2.0 compliant XML including BPMN DI information.

Best regards,

Tijs
melissap (2) [Avatar] Offline
#6
Re: Open-Source BPMS Comparison
Hi

I've been looking for a comparison between opensource BPM solutions - so also like the approach the book takes with the comparison. However it is now 2014 - you book and the comments above were from 2012.

Would you still have the same opinions for these comparisons as there've been a number of releases for each.. including Activiti obviously as well as the new comer Camunda.

What are you thoughts on the various open source options available I have seen
jBPM, Activiti, Bonita, Intalio, ProcessMaker, Camunda.. there might be more?

Thanks in Advance
melissap (2) [Avatar] Offline
#7
Re: Open-Source BPMS Comparison
Hi

I've been looking for a comparison between opensource BPM solutions - so also like the approach the book takes with the comparison. However it is now 2014 - you book and the comments above were from 2012.

Would you still have the same opinions for these comparisons as there've been a number of releases for each.. including Activiti obviously as well as the new comer Camunda.

What are you thoughts on the various open source options available I have seen
jBPM, Activiti, Bonita, Intalio, ProcessMaker, Camunda.. there might be more?

Thanks in Advance