Ok, I will move these attributes to drools-core (InternalResource). Later,
we can think about move them to drools-api.
Geoffrey, I like your idea, but I think that is not the "drools way" :).
What Mark wants is to always add new stuff in core and later, when it is
stable enough, publish it through drool-api. I agree with this, but when the
improvements are only useful for api users (name and description are not
used in drools-core in any way) I find this a little bit cumbersome. The
feature is never going to be used if it is no exposed. Users must always
cast Resource to InternalResource if they want to use this (And I see a lot
of these casts even inside drools-core).
But, as a general solution, I'm not against the implementation of new
features in core first and the exposure on api later.
Best Regards,
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Esteban Aliverti
- Developer @
On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 9:04 AM, Geoffrey De Smet
<ge0ffrey.spam(a)gmail.com>wrote:
**
We could use Abstract* class trick (the Collections api does it and I use
it a lot in Planner):
drools-api has:
interface Resource
abstract class AbstractResource implement Resource
And the javadoc on interface Resource clearly states that they should
extend AbstractResource when implementing a custom Resource. Same for the
reference manual.
(Similar to interface List and class AbstractList)
Then if any new method is added, the AbstractResource implementation should
try to provide a reasonable default that works (but is possibly not as
efficient as a specific implementation).
As a result, any custom Resource that extend AbstractResource needed be
changed immediately (but might want to in time to implement a more efficient
implementation).
And, more importantly, we don't break binary backwards compatibility on
*api (unless they implemented Resource directly)
so less chance of "impossible to fix" if you have a project with a
dependency A and B
where A and B themselves depend on different drools versions,
as you can just use the "highest version" between those 2 dependencies.
Op 12-09-11 07:51, Mark Proctor schreef:
On 12/09/2011 06:36, Esteban Aliverti wrote:
Ok, I thought #droolsdev was ok too. Sorry about that.
The idea to have a 'name' and a 'description' attribute in
<Resource>
elements inside a change-set is to tag them or to add them some
human-friendly information so you can refer to it not using the URL or the
name of the asset (could be duplicated in different packages), but with a
name and a description.
These changes are 100% end-users oriented, that is why I put those
attributes in API. End users applications (like Guvnor) could take
advantages on these new attributes.
You can add them to the xml, and have that set them on the
InternalResource. We can migrate to public apis over time, I just want
people to take a much more conservative outlook on -api changes.
Mark
So, a change-set now could look like this (the new attributes are not
mandatory):
<change-set>
<add>
<resource *name="Loan Rules" description="Rules about
loans"*type="DRL" source="
http://someHost:1234/someDRLResource.drl"/>
<resource *name="Risk Rules" description="Rules about Risk
evaluation"* type="DRL" source="
http://someHost:1234/someOtherDRLResource.drl"/>
</add>
</change-set>
These attributes can also be used in Spring's configuration:
<drools:kbase id="kbase1" node="node1">
<drools:resources>
<resource *name="Loan Rules" description="Rules about
loans"*type="DRL" source="
http://someHost:1234/someDRLResource.drl"/>
<resource *name="Risk Rules" description="Rules about Risk
evaluation"* type="DRL" source="
http://someHost:1234/someOtherDRLResource.drl"/>
</drools:resources>
</drools:kbase>
WDYT?
Best Regards,
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Esteban Aliverti
- Developer @
http://www.plugtree.com
- Blog @
http://ilesteban.wordpress.com
On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 6:25 AM, Mark Proctor <mproctor(a)codehaus.org>wrote:
> Shoudn't name and description be on InternalResource, not on Resource?
>
> I think it's time to put a restriction on changes to "-api". Feel free
> to change core/compiler etc, but if you want to change -api we'll need
> to propose it here.
>
> Mark
>
> _______________________________________________
> rules-dev mailing list
> rules-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev
>
_______________________________________________
rules-dev mailing
listrules-dev@lists.jboss.orghttps://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev
_______________________________________________
rules-dev mailing
listrules-dev@lists.jboss.orghttps://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev
--
With kind regards,
Geoffrey De Smet
_______________________________________________
rules-dev mailing list
rules-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev