Hi Michael,
Yes, you are correct. We use the KnowledgeAgent that detects changes to rules in Guvnor based upon a changeset.
One more question. Is there any way I can mock StatelessKnowledgeSession so that I can mock the output Fact object.
Thank you
Santhosh Hegde A
From: rules-users-bounces@lists.jboss.org [mailto:rules-users-bounces@lists.jboss.org]
On Behalf Of Michael Anstis
Sent: Friday, August 08, 2014 11:28 PM
To: Rules Users List
Subject: Re: [rules-users] Mocking Guvnor
Sounds like your service uses KnowledgeAgent that detects changes to rules in Guvnor based upon a changeset?
Either way your requirement remains the same: *your* application architecture needs to support (at least) the ability to provide different changesets (for testing you can use a changeset that points to a local folder containing rules rather than Guvnor).
You're not going to be able to avoid mocking some part of your application if you don't want to get rules from Guvnor (although I prefer the term pluggable - CDI use of @Specialises or @Alternative would be a good example, but IDK if you use CDI).
Sent on the move
On 8 Aug 2014 18:03, "san_hegde" <santhosh.hegde@hp.com> wrote:
Actually during functional testing we want to test our service which in turn calls rules and we want
to test the service with changing rules. But we do not want to change the rules in Guvnor rather we want to somehow mock it. Means depending on our tests we want to use different modified rules. For this if we can mock the session or guvnor or somehow so
that we session can return the mocked fact depending on our test.
Thank you
Santhosh Hegde A
From: Stephen Masters [via Drools]
[mailto:ml-node+[hidden email]]
Sent: Friday, August 08, 2014 9:10 PM
To: Ajekar, Santhosh Hegde (HP-IT)
Subject: Re: [rules-users] Mocking Guvnor
Possibly also worth pointing out that inserting a fact and executing a session do not connect to Guvnor anyway?
Although, as Mike mentions, the simplest approach tends to be to create a service which wraps knowledge base access and mock that. Although you could also mock the session.
Although, I must admit I’m not sure what question is being asked...
Steve
On 8 Aug 2014, at 13:07, Michael Anstis <[hidden email]> wrote:
I assume you have a service encapsulating your use of Drools?
Why not mock this service to use an implementation that returns what you need?
On 8 August 2014 03:13, san_hegde <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi ,
We have requirement where in during functional testing we do not want to connect to Guvnor rather want to mock it.
For example mocking could be like this.
We send Fact object as input during calling knowledgeSession.execute() method and in rule we update the result in that fact object itself. So here can we mock the
output fact object, so that during functional testing we no need to connect to Guvnor rather mocked result fact object is returned.
Thank you
Santhosh Hegde A
View this message in context:
Mocking Guvnor
Sent from the
Drools: User forum mailing list archive at
Nabble.com.
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion below:
http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/Mocking-Guvnor-tp4030601p4030608.html
To start a new topic under Drools: User forum, email
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from Drools: User forum, click here.
NAML
View this message in context:
RE: [rules-users] Mocking Guvnor
Sent from the
Drools: User forum mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users