Is there anything more to add on this? We are in the same situation as Paul and are considering elaborating fit-for-rules or writing our own fit/fitnesse stuff (maybe more like Servicefixture). We hope to have business types take care of testing their rules based on pkgs dev provides them. I've also read this post: http://blog.athico.com/2007/12/testing-rules-introduction.html What's the status on this 'integrated testing tool' mentioned in the blog? Joel Paul Browne wrote:As part of the some 'stuff' (you may be able to guess!) found myself r needing to integrate FIT for Rules and the BRMS. No big deal in doing the integration, just plugged in a new BRMSEngine fixture instead of the existing Engine fixture. Two questions a) This code is generic - would you be interested in a copy for the Fit for Rules project? There are other (minor) updates to the code. or b) Do you have something big up your sleeve that will (soon) make this redundant (i.e. the QA Tab on the BRMS). Trouble is , would like to write this up now(!). Am I right in assuming the 'QA' tab will effectively be Fit for Rules integrated into the BRMS? (in which case the samples will be easy to port later). Ta Paul _______________________________________________ rules-dev mailing list rules-dev@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev