I'm not sure there's a huge benefit. The main reason I was looking at upgrades
from 5.3 recently was to sort out the problem in Guvnor where LHS and RHS rows are
misaligned in Guvnor web decision tables. That was fixed in 5.4.
Having just attempted the migration, I would agree with avoiding 5.5.0.Final. Too many
Guvnor features were broken, so I had to just give up on that project. The breakage of
rule templates wasn't a serious issue for me, but the loss of data enumerations was a
killer. For now, we're keeping 5.3 decision tables short, and hoping that 5.5.1 or 5.6
might resolve some of the critical regressions.
So that would be my tip … unless you're experiencing problems on 5.3 that were
resolved in 5.4, just hang fire on the effort of upgrading until a patch or two have gone
out on 5.5.
On 11 Apr 2013, at 17:06, Lance Leverich <lance.leverich(a)gmail.com> wrote:
My company started out using Drools/Guvnor v5.1.1, for a single
product/project. Later, we decided to start building an enterprise oriented service, which
was partially completed and is based upon Drools/Guvnor v5.3.0.
Recently, the decision has been made to get all of our Drools/Guvnor instances running
the same version. I ran into issues (mostly related to dependencies and the use of
rule-flows) when I initially attempted to just get everything running on v5.3.0. But those
issues seem to have all gone away when I replaced my rule-flows with BPMN's and moved
everything to a v5.3.5 instance.
My question, for this group, is whether there are good reasons to move even further
forward and upgrade everything to v5.4.x? If so, what might those reasons be? Are there
any known, significant, issues in one or more of the 5.4 versions? Is there any consensus
on which patch version of the 5.4 tree would be best? I have already been told by upper
management that they would not support moving to v5.5.x, so that's not even on the
Any feedback would be appreciated.
rules-users mailing list