[rules-users] Question about the Nature of Ruleflows

I'm trying to wrap my mind around the nature of ruleflows -- and I think this question sums up a bit of my confusion. I have a stateful knowledge session. The stateful knowledge session has a ruleflow associated with it. That ruleflow diverges into two branches -- branch A and branch B -- based on a rule constraint. It's an XOR, and the mvel rule constraints are something like this: to branch A $u : User( $i : userId ) exists ( Dog( owner == $i, hasDogTag == false) ) to branch B $u : User( $i : userId ) not ( Dog( owner == $i, hasDogTag == false) ) Then the two branches converge again. I insert two facts: user 1, whose dogs all have dog tags, and user 2 whose third dog is missing a tag. Then, after I insert both facts, I fire all rules. Should the flow be like this? user 1: start --> diverge --> branch A (tell him to buy dog tags) --> converge --> end user 2: start --> diverge --> branch B (leave him alone) --> converge --> end Or does a ruleflow look at the whole session rather than each fact -- in which case either both users would pass through branch A, or both would pass through branch B? If I want the first case to happen, is there something I'm missing in the implementation? And are there any more details I can add to make my post more specific? Thank you for your help. -- View this message in context: http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/Question-about-the-Nature-of-Ruleflows-... Sent from the Drools: User forum mailing list archive at Nabble.com.