Re: [rules-users] Good To Have: TaskClient Interface

There is MinaTaskClient and BaseTaskClient, but no TaskClient interface. That is why: public void start( long taskId, String userId, TaskOperationResponseHandler responseHandler ) public void stop( long taskId, String userId, TaskOperationResponseHandler responseHandler ) public void release( long taskId, String userId, TaskOperationResponseHandler responseHandler ) public void suspend( long taskId, String userId, TaskOperationResponseHandler responseHandler ) public void resume( long taskId, String userId, TaskOperationResponseHandler responseHandler ) public void skip( long taskId, String userId, TaskOperationResponseHandler responseHandler ) public void delegate( long taskId, String userId, String targetUserId, TaskOperationResponseHandler responseHandler ) public void complete( long taskId, String userId, ContentData outputData, TaskOperationResponseHandler responseHandler ) ... is not a reusable approach (to get rid of Mina, and use something else [ JMS, DB, etc.. ] ). I think it would make sense to create an interface defining the contract, and program to that interface. Am I missing something? Thank you, /Anatoly P.S. I know the whole approach is going to change to be pluggable in the near future, but I find it strange there is no contract/interface that defines a task lifecycle. -- View this message in context: http://drools-java-rules-engine.46999.n3.nabble.com/Good-To-Have-TaskClie... Sent from the Drools - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. _______________________________________________ rules-users mailing list rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users