Pros of Camunda BPM Platform

• More extensive documentation and community support
• Offers a robust enterprise edition with additional features
• Provides a user-friendly modeler tool for process design

Cons of Camunda BPM Platform

• Steeper learning curve for beginners
• Larger footprint and potentially higher resource consumption
• Less flexible licensing options compared to Flowable Engine

Code Comparison

Camunda BPM Platform:

@Deployment(resources = "process.bpmn")
public void testProcess() {
  runtimeService.startProcessInstanceByKey("myProcess");
  Task task = taskService.createTaskQuery().singleResult();
  taskService.complete(task.getId());
}

Flowable Engine:

@Deployment(resources = "process.bpmn20.xml")
public void testProcess() {
  ProcessInstance processInstance = runtimeService.startProcessInstanceByKey("myProcess");
  Task task = taskService.createTaskQuery().processInstanceId(processInstance.getId()).singleResult();
  taskService.complete(task.getId());
}

Both frameworks use similar APIs for process deployment, execution, and task management. The main differences lie in the specific method names and the way process instances are handled. Camunda BPM Platform tends to have a more concise syntax, while Flowable Engine offers more explicit control over process instance management.

Pros of Activiti

• Longer history and established community support
• More extensive documentation and tutorials
• Better integration with Spring Framework

Cons of Activiti

• Slower release cycle and feature updates
• Less focus on cloud-native and microservices architecture
• More complex configuration for advanced use cases

Code Comparison

Activiti process definition:

<process id="myProcess" name="My Process">
  <startEvent id="start" />
  <userTask id="userTask" name="User Task" />
  <endEvent id="end" />
  <sequenceFlow sourceRef="start" targetRef="userTask" />
  <sequenceFlow sourceRef="userTask" targetRef="end" />
</process>

Flowable process definition:

<process id="myProcess" name="My Process">
  <startEvent id="start" />
  <userTask id="userTask" name="User Task" />
  <endEvent id="end" />
  <sequenceFlow sourceRef="start" targetRef="userTask" />
  <sequenceFlow sourceRef="userTask" targetRef="end" />
</process>

The process definitions are nearly identical, as Flowable was forked from Activiti. The main differences lie in the surrounding ecosystem, API implementations, and additional features provided by each project.

Both Activiti and Flowable offer robust business process management capabilities, with Flowable focusing more on modern, cloud-native architectures and Activiti maintaining a strong connection to traditional enterprise environments. The choice between the two often depends on specific project requirements and existing technology stacks.

Pros of Camunda

• More extensive documentation and community support
• Offers a wider range of tools and integrations, including Camunda Modeler
• Better suited for large-scale enterprise deployments

Cons of Camunda

• Steeper learning curve for beginners
• Can be more resource-intensive, especially for smaller projects
• Licensing model may be less flexible for some use cases

Code Comparison

Camunda (Java):

@Deployment(resources = "process.bpmn")
public void testProcess() {
  ProcessInstance processInstance = runtimeService.startProcessInstanceByKey("myProcess");
  Task task = taskService.createTaskQuery().singleResult();
  taskService.complete(task.getId());
  assertProcessEnded(processInstance.getId());
}

Flowable (Java):

@Test
@Deployment(resources = "process.bpmn20.xml")
public void testProcess() {
  ProcessInstance processInstance = runtimeService.startProcessInstanceByKey("myProcess");
  Task task = taskService.createTaskQuery().singleResult();
  taskService.complete(task.getId());
  assertProcessEnded(processInstance.getProcessInstanceId());
}

Both examples demonstrate similar process execution and task completion, with minor syntax differences. Camunda uses assertProcessEnded directly, while Flowable requires getProcessInstanceId() for the assertion.