You can't be much worse off if you add "package foo" to the template.
Or is there a problem with this obvious workaround?
-W

On 27 August 2010 18:25, drdaveg <drdaveg@gmail.com> wrote:

I am trying to incorporate several templates in a single output drl file.
According to the 5.0.1 docs "package" is optional:

Example 5.3. Rule template file: templates
template header
parameter-name-1
...
parameter-name-n
package ... # optional

However, it seems that the drools parser uses "package" as a keyword to
identify when it has passed header information.  Not having a "package"
specifier in either 5.0.1 or 5.1.1 yields:

java.lang.IllegalArgumentException: value rule "rules for reject non-header
@{id}" is not a valid column definition
       at
org.drools.template.parser.ColumnFactory.getColumn(ColumnFactory.java:34)

which cannot be overcome by tricks like

// package a.b.c
or
#  package a.b.c

Are other people experiencing this?  Is there a fix planned for the parser?


--
View this message in context: http://drools-java-rules-engine.46999.n3.nabble.com/Template-bug-on-package-keyword-tp1374638p1374638.html
Sent from the Drools - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users