camunda / camunda-bpmn-js

Embeddable Camunda modeling distributions based on bpmn-js
MIT License
106 stars 22 forks source link

Provide separate Modelers #1

Closed pinussilvestrus closed 3 years ago

pinussilvestrus commented 3 years ago

base

camunda-cloud cf. zeebe-io/zeebe-modeler#BpmnModeler

Everything from base + zeebe related modules

camunda-platform cf. camunda/camunda-modeler#BpmnModeler

Everything from base + camunda related modules

What else?

available in Camunda Modeler as well, do we need them here? --> I'd vote for no


Related to https://github.com/zeebe-io/zeebe-modeler/issues/288

pinussilvestrus commented 3 years ago

Open questions (03-02-2021)

pinussilvestrus commented 3 years ago

Chat with Cawemo (04-02-2021)

pinussilvestrus commented 3 years ago

Chat with Cloud (04-02-2021)

nikku commented 3 years ago

I'm wondering why we excluded this one as we decided what to include in our distributions:

* [ ] @bpmn-io/add-exporter --> this would require to set exporter metadata any time

In fact, it is best practice to set an exporter (and required meta-data). We could argue that it makes sense for our consumers to provide it.

pinussilvestrus commented 3 years ago

I think we decided this because we don't want to force our users to set the exporter (throws an error) any time they use a camunda-bpmn-js Modeler. The goal was to keep the configuration effort as small as possible.

But I see that this one should be at least available. Maybe we can update bpmn-io/add-exporter to have the config.exporter optional? Or we only include this module in the camunda-bpmn-js Modelers once the config is defined.

nikku commented 3 years ago

I think we decided this because we don't want to force our users to set the exporter (throws an error) any time they use a camunda-bpmn-js Modeler. The goal was to keep the configuration effort as small as possible.

That is a valid point. Why not force them to do it though? As mentioned, this is best practice that any of our modeling tools should follow. If a diagram is edited in Optimize it should clearly state Optimize, v412.1 in the exporter field. If it is edited in the cloud console you could argue for a similar thing.

We could set up a naming conventions on our side and document it. With that in place, enforcing the exporter to be set (and best practices to be followed) should not cause our users too much pain.

nikku commented 3 years ago

Created https://github.com/camunda/camunda-bpmn-js/issues/32 to track my feedback.

pinussilvestrus commented 3 years ago

Thanks for your feedback 👍 I think it makes sense to enforce it (if it's well documented).