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@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@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev



_______________________________________________
rules-dev mailing list
rules-dev@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev



_______________________________________________
rules-dev mailing list
rules-dev@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev


-- 
With kind regards,
Geoffrey De Smet