2

I am new to serviceMix, I downloaded serviceMix 4.5.1 a couple of days ago.

When I tried to install ode in serviceMix using the command features:install ode

It tells me this:

Error executing command: No feature named 'ode' with version '0.0.0' available

I googled/baidued mass of webs, I got a bad news that:

"Fuse ESB 4.4 does not support Apache ODE. The latest version of ODE is not compatible with Fuse ESB."

which comes from

http://fusesource.com/forums/thread.jspa?messageID=11209

Fuse ESB - ODE installation

So if serviceMix 4.4 does not support ODE any longer, what is the alternative way to do the web service orchestration in serviceMix? I have tried use camel to do this work,but that's not easy.

How about "bpel-g"?(http://code.google.com/p/bpel-g/) is it a good choice? or any other choice?

Any help will be really appreciated.

рüффп
  • 5,172
  • 34
  • 67
  • 113
Jack-Chan
  • 21
  • 3
  • 1
    Please try an [ODE 1.x snapshot](https://builds.apache.org/view/M-R/view/ODE/job/ODE-1.x/lastStableBuild/) and file a bug if it does not work. Actually, ODE supports ServiceMix/JBI, but does not follow its release cycle. If you help by providing such feedback, its easier for us to make a release soonish. – vanto Jun 14 '13 at 11:06
  • 1
    But your last release is 2.5 years old. Why would people think that Apache ODE would be a good project to use when it appears as not active project? – Claus Ibsen Jun 16 '13 at 07:37

2 Answers2

0

I like Activiti for processes and orchestration.

Never run it inside Karaf/SMX/Fuse ESB but it should be possible, if not using this instruction.

It also has a nice web explorer for human tasks etc. if you need it and BPMN modeller for rapid desing and visualization

Petter Nordlander
  • 22,053
  • 5
  • 50
  • 84
  • There is one issue with using Activiti, I think. Can it really do Web Service orchestration? It's [Web Service Task](http://www.activiti.org/userguide/index.html#bpmnWebserviceTask) is marked as experimental and one and a half years ago, a colleague of mine couldn't get it to work. That might have changed, though. – joergl Jun 14 '13 at 07:52
  • Not sure about the status of the web service component in Activiti. My idea is that you could use Camel (also runnining inside SMX) for the integration layer (i.e. web service calls) and Activiti for the orchestration/process layer. I think the mix is very powerful. The orchestration part of activiti is very good. – Petter Nordlander Jun 14 '13 at 08:57
  • I aggree, this sounds reasonable. Perhaps, the combination with Camel is also what the Activiti people have in mind. – joergl Jun 14 '13 at 09:02
  • 2
    The problem with this approach is that neither Activiti nor Camel are really capable to support more complex WS interactions (i.e. conversations) like BPEL does. Correlation based on business values is simply not possible without a message correlation framework, which IMO does not exist yet. – vanto Jun 14 '13 at 11:03
  • Sure, it depends on what you want to achieve - of course. Just pointed out a possible option if ODE is tricky to get running in this version of Karaf/SMX. – Petter Nordlander Jun 14 '13 at 11:28
0

I would recommend to try bpel-g. A colleague and me have been doing some BPEL conformance benchmarking lately (fyi: the benchmarking tool is available at github) and bpel-g turned out have the highest degree of support for the BPEL spec., along with the older ActiveBPEL engine from which bpel-g is a fork. ODE ranked third place.

Another nice feature of bpel-g is that it is indeed actively maintained. I don't know how well it integrates into the infrastructure of Fuse ESB, but since it's deployable as a war, this shouldn't be much of a problem.

UPDATE: Just had a look up: bpel-g seems to integrate with camel and provides a custom handler to invoke camel components. So, basically, the solution outlined in Petters answer also applies to bpel-g and, in contrast to Activiti, it has a message correlation framework. Finally, the barrier to using it should be smaller, as you already know BPEL. As a consequence, bpel-g might be a more suitable solution here.

joergl
  • 2,850
  • 4
  • 36
  • 42