[rules-users] BRMS: Evaluation: JBoss Rules 3.2?
Mark Proctor
mproctor at codehaus.org
Mon Feb 5 07:41:30 EST 2007
The code for M1 is ready, I'm fighting maven at the moment and losing :(
Btw anyone from the community that wants to work on our build system
would be very much appreciated and will help us put out releases faster.
Currently we use ant with embedded maven, we want to go to 100% maven
but keep hitting bugs :( The latest one is profiles for ydoc. Anyway if
your a maven wiz and want help, please do contact us.
Mark
Anstis, Michael (M.) wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Is there any update as to the availability of ruleflow in 3.2 as it's
> become pivotal to our use of JBoss Rules?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Mike
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* Mark Proctor [mailto:mproctor at codehaus.org]
> *Sent:* 23 January 2007 16:50
> *To:* Anstis, Michael (M.)
> *Subject:* Re: [rules-users] BRMS: Evaluation: JBoss Rules 3.2?
>
> as soon as MVEL is ready we'll do an M1, but the ruleflow part is
> not exposed to thte drl language yet, that will take a few more weeks.
>
> Mark
> Anstis, Michael (M.) wrote:
>> I might have a play around just to see how I get on, but think
>> I'll wait for 3.1 before I get "serious" - can I get the latest
>> (unstable) code (is it CVS or somewhere)?
>>
>> - and I won't be using this private address ongoing (I didn't
>> want to hit the rules list with news of your latest code).
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> *From:* rules-users-bounces at lists.jboss.org
>> [mailto:rules-users-bounces at lists.jboss.org] *On Behalf Of
>> *Mark Proctor
>> *Sent:* 23 January 2007 16:13
>> *To:* Rules Users List
>> *Subject:* Re: [rules-users] BRMS: Evaluation: JBoss Rules 3.2?
>>
>> not sure its that simple as the stack concept is built into
>> the engine. but good luck.
>>
>> Mark
>> Anstis, Michael (M.) wrote:
>>> Thanks Mark,
>>>
>>> I think I've got the hang of AgendaGroups!!
>>>
>>> Presumably if I sub-class DefaultAgenda and override
>>> setFocus(AgendaGroup ag) and getNextfocus() I can implement
>>> my own flow-like mechanism instead of the standard stack.
>>> I'd need to add a way in which to override the DefaultAgenda
>>> created in ReteooWorkingMemory's constructor too but this
>>> again should be a simple sub-class (together with a subclass
>>> of ReteooRulebase with override of newWorkingMemory and a
>>> new RuleBaseFactory to allow me to construct these new
>>> objects). Anything major I've missed - my experience with
>>> rules engines now totals a couple of weeks and it's possible
>>> I'm missing the point!!
>>>
>>> With kind regards,
>>>
>>> Mike
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> *From:* rules-users-bounces at lists.jboss.org
>>> [mailto:rules-users-bounces at lists.jboss.org] *On Behalf
>>> Of *Mark Proctor
>>> *Sent:* 22 January 2007 16:33
>>> *To:* Rules Users List
>>> *Subject:* Re: [rules-users] BRMS: Evaluation: JBoss
>>> Rules 3.2?
>>>
>>> Anstis,
>>>
>>> We don't have ruleflow, but we do have AgendaGroups
>>> which can provide a form of rule flow, just that its
>>> actually stack based. I'm working on a more general
>>> ruleflow idea at the moment, it may make it into the end
>>> of Q1 release, but its not defnite yet.
>>>
>>> Normally you cache the rulebase in a singleton and then
>>> just creating working memory instances as and when you
>>> need to - creating a working memory is light.
>>>
>>> The guided gui builder is for 3.2, it's web only based
>>> on GWT, I believe that it will also do DSLs (Mic will
>>> have to confirm that).
>>>
>>> Mark
>>> Anstis, Michael (M.) wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> I'm evaluating BRMS's for a new project at work.
>>>>
>>>> JBoss Rules today swung into pole position however I am
>>>> unclear on a number of features. I wonder whether this
>>>> user-group can help?
>>>>
>>>> I list a number of aspects I "think" are currently
>>>> missing in JBoss Rules together with my thoughts: If
>>>> anybody can clarify the position, provide alternatives
>>>> or help push JBoss Rules I'd be pleased to hear!
>>>>
>>>> * We require ruleflow (where rules run
>>>> sequentially; like "identify all machines X" then
>>>> "calculate prices" - not perhaps a good
>>>> illustration as this could be written as one rule
>>>> "calculate all prices using machine XXX"!!!).
>>>> Ideally "dynamic" ruleflow is required too -
>>>> where the next rule in a sequence is determined
>>>> by the outcome of a preceding rule (I have seen
>>>> dynamic achieved with "trigger" Facts asserted as
>>>> the RHS of rules however our "Business Users"
>>>> cannot be expected to author rules following this
>>>> design pattern. I have also seen static
>>>> implemented with salience). Is ruleflow (static
>>>> or dynamic) part of 3.2 - otherwise we'll need to
>>>> categorise rules having different types fired
>>>> throughout a "coded" process in Java.
>>>> * A J2EE runtime to provide scalability of the RETE
>>>> engine. We need to have the engine being shared
>>>> across sessions on a web-server. What experiences
>>>> have others had? Do you simply provide a working
>>>> memory instance per session (how does this scale
>>>> horizontally?). I also read that an Application
>>>> Server runtime would be part of 3.2, is this true?
>>>> * A rule authoring environment for end-users. I
>>>> read on Mark Proctor's blogg that this is in
>>>> development but is it set for inclusion in 3.2
>>>> and does it handle DSL too; otherwise we'd have
>>>> to write out own?
>>>>
>>>> With kind regards,
>>>>
>>>> Michael Anstis
>>>> -------------------------------------------
>>>> *Next Generation Estimating System*
>>>> ( Trafford House (Int) 8 718 2239
>>>> ( Trafford House (Ext) +44 (0)1268 702239
>>>> * <_mailto:manstis1 at ford.com_>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> rules-users mailing list
>>>> rules-users at lists.jboss.org
>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
>>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> rules-users mailing list
>>> rules-users at lists.jboss.org
>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
>>>
>>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> rules-users mailing list
> rules-users at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/rules-users/attachments/20070205/f5c6fc58/attachment.html
More information about the rules-users
mailing list