Mark, I've already a bit of code that does simple Spring Integration (and am clear to donate it to Drools, need to change it to LGPL). Not sure what you'll think of the quality (!) but already used on a client site, might be a useful starting point.

http://red-piranha.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/red-piranha/trunk/rp-core/s... Paul Mark Proctor wrote: > I'd like to add two sub projects to Drools to enable better spring > and guice support - especially now we have the RuleAgent. Any > volunteers for this? I'd like to try and standardise, as much as > possible, how Drools works and integrates with IoC containers. > > Ultimiately the integration should be quite lightweight - mostly > about creating rulebases and working memory and probably the scoping > and caching of these. I guess you could also have some life cycle > management about objects themselves and auto assertion/retraction to > named working memories. We'd need to define a set of agreed > annotations to define these things, that would work across > containers. I believe the JBoss MC people have done some work in this > area, I have cc'd to see if they have any input or documentation > pointers. > > The core dev team don't have the time and aren't spring/guice > specialists - so anyone willing to take this up? If we can get > reasonable implementations we will add them to subversion (and the > authors commit rights), and make part of the next release - assuming > they are of good enough quality. > > So any takers, maybe we could atleast start at defining what this > level of integration should look like? > > Mark > _______________________________________________ > rules-dev mailing list > rules-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev > _______________________________________________ rules-dev mailing list rules-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev

Mark / Xavier No problem with using that class under the Apache licence if needed. Do I need to sign in blood somewhere? :-) That class is 'just' a simple JavaBean that wraps the Drools classes, allows Spring XML to configure it. Think the most simple integration possible. Xavier: Is there anything that you need / how can I help? Paul Mark Proctor wrote: > Paul Browne wrote: >> Mark, >> >> I've already a bit of code that does simple Spring Integration (and >> am clear to donate it to Drools, need to change it to LGPL). Not sure >> what you'll think of the quality (!) but already used on a client >> site, might be a useful starting point. >> > Can we get it ASL, instead of LGPL? Xavier was on irc today, I think > he's going to have a crack at it too. So keep an eye out for him. Make > sure you read over Ales ideas that he implemented for the JBoss MC, > many of them are applicable. >> http://red-piranha.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/red-piranha/trunk/rp-core/s... >> >> >> Paul >> >> Mark Proctor wrote: >>> I'd like to add two sub projects to Drools to enable better spring >>> and guice support - especially now we have the RuleAgent. Any >>> volunteers for this? I'd like to try and standardise, as much as >>> possible, how Drools works and integrates with IoC containers. >>> >>> Ultimiately the integration should be quite lightweight - mostly >>> about creating rulebases and working memory and probably the scoping >>> and caching of these. I guess you could also have some life cycle >>> management about objects themselves and auto assertion/retraction to >>> named working memories. We'd need to define a set of agreed >>> annotations to define these things, that would work across >>> containers. I believe the JBoss MC people have done some work in >>> this area, I have cc'd to see if they have any input or >>> documentation pointers. >>> >>> The core dev team don't have the time and aren't spring/guice >>> specialists - so anyone willing to take this up? If we can get >>> reasonable implementations we will add them to subversion (and the >>> authors commit rights), and make part of the next release - assuming >>> they are of good enough quality. >>> >>> So any takers, maybe we could atleast start at defining what this >>> level of integration should look like? >>> >>> Mark >>> _______________________________________________ >>> rules-dev mailing list >>> rules-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev >>> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> rules-dev mailing list >> rules-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev >> > > _______________________________________________ rules-dev mailing list rules-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev

Mark Proctor wrote: > Ultimiately the integration should be quite lightweight - mostly about > creating rulebases and working memory and probably the scoping and > caching of these. I guess you could also have some life cycle management > about objects themselves and auto assertion/retraction to named working > memories. > > Sorry for the late entry Mark. If this the desired scope, the work I did for 2.0 is probably highly relevant. It had factory beans for creating WM and such. Is that code checked into the jboss version of the repository?

-barry