I completely agree with everything you
said and I feel I should be trying to do things in that manner myself…hence,
my hesitence to create static java classes/methods for use as function
libraries and rely instead on defined functions in the rule if possible(from an
earlier discussion).
I have been reading on the ruleflow
recently and discovered that I in fact, may need to be using some fo those features
isntead of a fusion-centric approach I was taking before, since I have some
processes that need to be fired off during rule execution and take time to
complete. Can fusion and ruleflow be used seamlessly together..or
more specifically are there samples containing the melding of two. I am
essentialy dealing with periodic sensor data incoming(hence my decicion to
examine fusion as the solution ) but have since realized that there is a
worklfow or process that needs to be kicked off and follow up processes that
need to be completed in order to make further decisions on the objects in
working memory(which ruleflow sounds ideal for).
Also, are the bug fixes available in
binary download or only in src? I have had a hell of a time getting maven
to work for me.
Thanks very much,
Chris
From:
rules-users-bounces@lists.jboss.org
[mailto:rules-users-bounces@lists.jboss.org] On
Behalf Of Edson Tirelli
Sent: Thursday, June 25, 2009 9:40
AM
To:
Subject: Re: [rules-users] firing
explicit rules or agend-groups
Sorry for the short answer... busy day.
The main problem with agenda filter is that it is defined in
application code and so creates a dependency in the rules from the application
code. So, you break one of the biggest advantages of rules that is to have a
separate lifecycle for rules. There are other small things too, but that is IMO
the most limiting. I use agenda filters only for unit testing and debugging.
My preferred approach is to model the rules in a way that they
only fire when they should fire, using ruleflow, agenda-groups and other
"rule features" as opposed to have the application messing with the
agenda.
[]s
Edson
2009/6/25 Chris Richmond <crichmond@referentia.com>
Ok…well when the recognized expert says something is
not their preferred approach, it begs the question …what is your
preferred approach for handling this?
Thanks,
Chris
From: rules-users-bounces@lists.jboss.org
[mailto:rules-users-bounces@lists.jboss.org]
On Behalf Of Edson Tirelli
Sent: Thursday, June 25, 2009 2:30
AM
To:
Subject: Re: [rules-users] firing
explicit rules or agend-groups
Chris,
Although not my preferred approach, you can use agenda filters as
a parameter to fireAllRules().
[]s
Edson
2009/6/24
Chris Richmond <crichmond@referentia.com>
Hello,
I
thought I had encountered a sample of performing a:
session.fireAllRules();
except
on explicit rules or at least on a specific agenda group…but I cannot
seem to locate that in the API for sessions….did I miss something or did
I imagine something before?
Thanks,
Chris
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
--
Edson Tirelli
JBoss Drools Core Development
JBoss by Red Hat @ www.jboss.com
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
--
Edson Tirelli
JBoss Drools Core Development
JBoss by Red Hat @ www.jboss.com