9:53 a.m.
Hi,
Can anyone know whether QA features can provide the rule conflict checks?
Thanks
10:24 a.m.
Please don't assume that everybody knows which "features" and
which "conflicts" and which "checks" you have in mind.
-W
2010/12/30 Benson Fung <benson.redhat(a)gmail.com>:
Hi,
Can anyone know whether QA features can provide the rule conflict checks?
Thanks
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
10:42 a.m.
I would like to check if there is any conflict among the created rules in
the BRMS 5.1. Can the QA/Verify can check this out?
On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 5:24 PM, Wolfgang Laun <wolfgang.laun(a)gmail.com>wrote:
Please don't assume that everybody knows which
"features" and
which "conflicts" and which "checks" you have in mind.
-W
2010/12/30 Benson Fung <benson.redhat(a)gmail.com>:
> Hi,
>
> Can anyone know whether QA features can provide the rule conflict checks?
>
>
> Thanks
>
> _______________________________________________
> rules-users mailing list
> rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
>
>
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
--
Benson Fung
Solution Architect, Global Services, Greater China
| Redhat Hong Kong Limited || 45/F., The Lee Gardens, 33 Hysan Avenue,
Causeway Bay, Hong Kong || Office : 852-31802332 || Cell : 852-98369898 ||
benson.fung(a)redhat.com || http://www.hk.redhat.com||
10:52 a.m.
Please define "conflict".
-W
2010/12/30 Benson Fung <benson.fung(a)redhat.com>:
I would like to check if there is any conflict among the created
rules in
the BRMS 5.1. Can the QA/Verify can check this out?
On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 5:24 PM, Wolfgang Laun <wolfgang.laun(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
>
> Please don't assume that everybody knows which "features" and
> which "conflicts" and which "checks" you have in mind.
> -W
>
> 2010/12/30 Benson Fung <benson.redhat(a)gmail.com>:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Can anyone know whether QA features can provide the rule conflict
> > checks?
> >
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > rules-users mailing list
> > rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
> >
> >
> _______________________________________________
> rules-users mailing list
> rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
--
Benson Fung
Solution Architect, Global Services, Greater China
| Redhat Hong Kong Limited || 45/F., The Lee Gardens, 33 Hysan Avenue,
Causeway Bay, Hong Kong || Office : 852-31802332 || Cell : 852-98369898 ||
benson.fung(a)redhat.com || http://www.hk.redhat.com||
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
10:58 a.m.
The conflict is like :
E.g.
If (X = 90) then Score = 10;
If (X = 90) then Score = 100;
Can the BRMS detect this?
On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 5:52 PM, Wolfgang Laun <wolfgang.laun(a)gmail.com>wrote:
Please define "conflict".
-W
2010/12/30 Benson Fung <benson.fung(a)redhat.com>:
> I would like to check if there is any conflict among the created rules in
> the BRMS 5.1. Can the QA/Verify can check this out?
>
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 5:24 PM, Wolfgang Laun <wolfgang.laun(a)gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> Please don't assume that everybody knows which "features" and
>> which "conflicts" and which "checks" you have in mind.
>> -W
>>
>> 2010/12/30 Benson Fung <benson.redhat(a)gmail.com>:
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > Can anyone know whether QA features can provide the rule conflict
>> > checks?
>> >
>> >
>> > Thanks
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > rules-users mailing list
>> > rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
>> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
>> >
>> >
>> _______________________________________________
>> rules-users mailing list
>> rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
>
>
>
> --
> Benson Fung
> Solution Architect, Global Services, Greater China
> | Redhat Hong Kong Limited || 45/F., The Lee Gardens, 33 Hysan Avenue,
> Causeway Bay, Hong Kong || Office : 852-31802332 || Cell : 852-98369898
||
> benson.fung(a)redhat.com || http://www.hk.redhat.com||
>
> _______________________________________________
> rules-users mailing list
> rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
>
>
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
11:10 a.m.
The general case would be extremely difficult to solve. It would require
heavy expression manipulation. Consider a very simple variation:
X($f: foo)
Y(bar == $f)
as compared to
Y($b: bar)
X(foo == $b)
And you can play this game at any level of complexity.
And even your "straightforward" case would require the consideration of rule
attributes, since there would not be a conflict if they are in different
agenda groups, etc.
-W
2010/12/30 Benson Fung <benson.redhat(a)gmail.com>:
The conflict is like :
E.g.
If (X = 90) then Score = 10;
If (X = 90) then Score = 100;
Can the BRMS detect this?
On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 5:52 PM, Wolfgang Laun <wolfgang.laun(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
>
> Please define "conflict".
> -W
>
> 2010/12/30 Benson Fung <benson.fung(a)redhat.com>:
> > I would like to check if there is any conflict among the created rules
> > in
> > the BRMS 5.1. Can the QA/Verify can check this out?
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 5:24 PM, Wolfgang Laun <wolfgang.laun(a)gmail.com
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> Please don't assume that everybody knows which "features" and
> >> which "conflicts" and which "checks" you have in mind.
> >> -W
> >>
> >> 2010/12/30 Benson Fung <benson.redhat(a)gmail.com>:
> >> > Hi,
> >> >
> >> > Can anyone know whether QA features can provide the rule conflict
> >> > checks?
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Thanks
> >> >
> >> > _______________________________________________
> >> > rules-users mailing list
> >> > rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
> >> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
> >> >
> >> >
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> rules-users mailing list
> >> rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
> >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Benson Fung
> > Solution Architect, Global Services, Greater China
> > | Redhat Hong Kong Limited || 45/F., The Lee Gardens, 33 Hysan Avenue,
> > Causeway Bay, Hong Kong || Office : 852-31802332 || Cell : 852-98369898
> > ||
> > benson.fung(a)redhat.com || http://www.hk.redhat.com||
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > rules-users mailing list
> > rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
> >
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> rules-users mailing list
> rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
1:38 p.m.
I think QA analysis should find some of those problems. Did you try it? As
far as I know, it looks for range completeness, missing gaps, etc.
Best Regards,
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Esteban Aliverti
- Developer @ http://www.plugtree.com
- Blog @ http://ilesteban.wordpress.com
2010/12/30 Wolfgang Laun <wolfgang.laun(a)gmail.com>
The general case would be extremely difficult to solve. It would
require
heavy expression manipulation. Consider a very simple variation:
X($f: foo)
Y(bar == $f)
as compared to
Y($b: bar)
X(foo == $b)
And you can play this game at any level of complexity.
And even your "straightforward" case would require the consideration of
rule attributes, since there would not be a conflict if they are in
different agenda groups, etc.
-W
2010/12/30 Benson Fung <benson.redhat(a)gmail.com>:
> The conflict is like :
>
> E.g.
> If (X = 90) then Score = 10;
> If (X = 90) then Score = 100;
>
> Can the BRMS detect this?
>
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 5:52 PM, Wolfgang Laun <wolfgang.laun(a)gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> Please define "conflict".
>> -W
>>
>> 2010/12/30 Benson Fung <benson.fung(a)redhat.com>:
>> > I would like to check if there is any conflict among the created rules
>> > in
>> > the BRMS 5.1. Can the QA/Verify can check this out?
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 5:24 PM, Wolfgang Laun <
wolfgang.laun(a)gmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Please don't assume that everybody knows which "features"
and
>> >> which "conflicts" and which "checks" you have in
mind.
>> >> -W
>> >>
>> >> 2010/12/30 Benson Fung <benson.redhat(a)gmail.com>:
>> >> > Hi,
>> >> >
>> >> > Can anyone know whether QA features can provide the rule conflict
>> >> > checks?
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > Thanks
>> >> >
>> >> > _______________________________________________
>> >> > rules-users mailing list
>> >> > rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
>> >> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> rules-users mailing list
>> >> rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
>> >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Benson Fung
>> > Solution Architect, Global Services, Greater China
>> > | Redhat Hong Kong Limited || 45/F., The Lee Gardens, 33 Hysan Avenue,
>> > Causeway Bay, Hong Kong || Office : 852-31802332 || Cell :
852-98369898
>> > ||
>> > benson.fung(a)redhat.com || http://www.hk.redhat.com||
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > rules-users mailing list
>> > rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
>> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
>> >
>> >
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> rules-users mailing list
>> rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> rules-users mailing list
> rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
>
>
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
2:03 p.m.
Yes, I tried QA analysis. But it only can find out the problems of the
individual rules like what you said. I tried to develop two rules with
sames conditions but different consequences and do the QA analysis, it
cannot detect it unfortunately. :(
2010/12/30 Esteban Aliverti <esteban.aliverti(a)gmail.com>
I think QA analysis should find some of those problems. Did you try
it? As
far as I know, it looks for range completeness, missing gaps, etc.
Best Regards,
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Esteban Aliverti
- Developer @ http://www.plugtree.com
- Blog @ http://ilesteban.wordpress.com
2010/12/30 Wolfgang Laun <wolfgang.laun(a)gmail.com>
The general case would be extremely difficult to solve. It would require
> heavy expression manipulation. Consider a very simple variation:
> X($f: foo)
> Y(bar == $f)
> as compared to
> Y($b: bar)
> X(foo == $b)
>
> And you can play this game at any level of complexity.
>
> And even your "straightforward" case would require the consideration of
> rule attributes, since there would not be a conflict if they are in
> different agenda groups, etc.
>
>
> -W
>
>
>
> 2010/12/30 Benson Fung <benson.redhat(a)gmail.com>:
> > The conflict is like :
> >
> > E.g.
> > If (X = 90) then Score = 10;
> > If (X = 90) then Score = 100;
> >
> > Can the BRMS detect this?
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 5:52 PM, Wolfgang Laun <wolfgang.laun(a)gmail.com
> >
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> Please define "conflict".
> >> -W
> >>
> >> 2010/12/30 Benson Fung <benson.fung(a)redhat.com>:
> >> > I would like to check if there is any conflict among the created
> rules
> >> > in
> >> > the BRMS 5.1. Can the QA/Verify can check this out?
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 5:24 PM, Wolfgang Laun <
> wolfgang.laun(a)gmail.com>
> >> > wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> Please don't assume that everybody knows which
"features" and
> >> >> which "conflicts" and which "checks" you have
in mind.
> >> >> -W
> >> >>
> >> >> 2010/12/30 Benson Fung <benson.redhat(a)gmail.com>:
> >> >> > Hi,
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Can anyone know whether QA features can provide the rule
conflict
> >> >> > checks?
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Thanks
> >> >> >
> >> >> > _______________________________________________
> >> >> > rules-users mailing list
> >> >> > rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
> >> >> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> _______________________________________________
> >> >> rules-users mailing list
> >> >> rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
> >> >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > Benson Fung
> >> > Solution Architect, Global Services, Greater China
> >> > | Redhat Hong Kong Limited || 45/F., The Lee Gardens, 33 Hysan
> Avenue,
> >> > Causeway Bay, Hong Kong || Office : 852-31802332 || Cell :
> 852-98369898
> >> > ||
> >> > benson.fung(a)redhat.com || http://www.hk.redhat.com||
> >> >
> >> > _______________________________________________
> >> > rules-users mailing list
> >> > rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
> >> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> rules-users mailing list
> >> rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
> >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > rules-users mailing list
> > rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
> >
> >
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> rules-users mailing list
> rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
>
>
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
2:35 p.m.
This is because the scenario you are describing is not always an
error/warning. Maybe for you it is an error, but for other people could be a
typical situation. I.e: if you have audit rules.
Best Regards,
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Esteban Aliverti
- Developer @ http://www.plugtree.com
- Blog @ http://ilesteban.wordpress.com
2010/12/30 Benson Fung <benson.redhat(a)gmail.com>
Yes, I tried QA analysis. But it only can find out the problems of
the
individual rules like what you said. I tried to develop two rules with
sames conditions but different consequences and do the QA analysis, it
cannot detect it unfortunately. :(
2010/12/30 Esteban Aliverti <esteban.aliverti(a)gmail.com>
I think QA analysis should find some of those problems. Did you try it? As
> far as I know, it looks for range completeness, missing gaps, etc.
>
> Best Regards,
>
> XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
>
> Esteban Aliverti
> - Developer @ http://www.plugtree.com
> - Blog @ http://ilesteban.wordpress.com
>
>
> 2010/12/30 Wolfgang Laun <wolfgang.laun(a)gmail.com>
>
> The general case would be extremely difficult to solve. It would require
>> heavy expression manipulation. Consider a very simple variation:
>> X($f: foo)
>> Y(bar == $f)
>> as compared to
>> Y($b: bar)
>> X(foo == $b)
>>
>> And you can play this game at any level of complexity.
>>
>> And even your "straightforward" case would require the consideration
of
>> rule attributes, since there would not be a conflict if they are in
>> different agenda groups, etc.
>>
>>
>> -W
>>
>>
>>
>> 2010/12/30 Benson Fung <benson.redhat(a)gmail.com>:
>> > The conflict is like :
>> >
>> > E.g.
>> > If (X = 90) then Score = 10;
>> > If (X = 90) then Score = 100;
>> >
>> > Can the BRMS detect this?
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 5:52 PM, Wolfgang Laun <
>> wolfgang.laun(a)gmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Please define "conflict".
>> >> -W
>> >>
>> >> 2010/12/30 Benson Fung <benson.fung(a)redhat.com>:
>> >> > I would like to check if there is any conflict among the created
>> rules
>> >> > in
>> >> > the BRMS 5.1. Can the QA/Verify can check this out?
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 5:24 PM, Wolfgang Laun <
>> wolfgang.laun(a)gmail.com>
>> >> > wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Please don't assume that everybody knows which
"features" and
>> >> >> which "conflicts" and which "checks" you
have in mind.
>> >> >> -W
>> >> >>
>> >> >> 2010/12/30 Benson Fung <benson.redhat(a)gmail.com>:
>> >> >> > Hi,
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Can anyone know whether QA features can provide the rule
conflict
>> >> >> > checks?
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Thanks
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > _______________________________________________
>> >> >> > rules-users mailing list
>> >> >> > rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
>> >> >> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> >> rules-users mailing list
>> >> >> rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
>> >> >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > --
>> >> > Benson Fung
>> >> > Solution Architect, Global Services, Greater China
>> >> > | Redhat Hong Kong Limited || 45/F., The Lee Gardens, 33 Hysan
>> Avenue,
>> >> > Causeway Bay, Hong Kong || Office : 852-31802332 || Cell :
>> 852-98369898
>> >> > ||
>> >> > benson.fung(a)redhat.com || http://www.hk.redhat.com||
>> >> >
>> >> > _______________________________________________
>> >> > rules-users mailing list
>> >> > rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
>> >> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> rules-users mailing list
>> >> rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
>> >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > rules-users mailing list
>> > rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
>> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> rules-users mailing list
>> rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> rules-users mailing list
> rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
>
>
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
5:41 p.m.
Hi Esteban,
Could you elaborate with your wordings 'audit rules'? I mean if there are
two rules with same conditions but different consequences within a package,
it could not be an error/warning as you said. Could you give me an
example/typical situation?
Thanks for your explaination.
2010/12/30 Esteban Aliverti <esteban.aliverti(a)gmail.com>
This is because the scenario you are describing is not always an
error/warning. Maybe for you it is an error, but for other people could be a
typical situation. I.e: if you have audit rules.
Best Regards,
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Esteban Aliverti
- Developer @ http://www.plugtree.com
- Blog @ http://ilesteban.wordpress.com
2010/12/30 Benson Fung <benson.redhat(a)gmail.com>
> Yes, I tried QA analysis. But it only can find out the problems of the
> individual rules like what you said. I tried to develop two rules with
> sames conditions but different consequences and do the QA analysis, it
> cannot detect it unfortunately. :(
>
>
>
>
> 2010/12/30 Esteban Aliverti <esteban.aliverti(a)gmail.com>
>
> I think QA analysis should find some of those problems. Did you try it? As
>> far as I know, it looks for range completeness, missing gaps, etc.
>>
>> Best Regards,
>>
>> XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
>>
>> Esteban Aliverti
>> - Developer @ http://www.plugtree.com
>> - Blog @ http://ilesteban.wordpress.com
>>
>>
>> 2010/12/30 Wolfgang Laun <wolfgang.laun(a)gmail.com>
>>
>> The general case would be extremely difficult to solve. It would require
>>> heavy expression manipulation. Consider a very simple variation:
>>> X($f: foo)
>>> Y(bar == $f)
>>> as compared to
>>> Y($b: bar)
>>> X(foo == $b)
>>>
>>> And you can play this game at any level of complexity.
>>>
>>> And even your "straightforward" case would require the
consideration of
>>> rule attributes, since there would not be a conflict if they are in
>>> different agenda groups, etc.
>>>
>>>
>>> -W
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 2010/12/30 Benson Fung <benson.redhat(a)gmail.com>:
>>> > The conflict is like :
>>> >
>>> > E.g.
>>> > If (X = 90) then Score = 10;
>>> > If (X = 90) then Score = 100;
>>> >
>>> > Can the BRMS detect this?
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 5:52 PM, Wolfgang Laun <
>>> wolfgang.laun(a)gmail.com>
>>> > wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> Please define "conflict".
>>> >> -W
>>> >>
>>> >> 2010/12/30 Benson Fung <benson.fung(a)redhat.com>:
>>> >> > I would like to check if there is any conflict among the
created
>>> rules
>>> >> > in
>>> >> > the BRMS 5.1. Can the QA/Verify can check this out?
>>> >> >
>>> >> >
>>> >> >
>>> >> > On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 5:24 PM, Wolfgang Laun <
>>> wolfgang.laun(a)gmail.com>
>>> >> > wrote:
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> Please don't assume that everybody knows which
"features" and
>>> >> >> which "conflicts" and which "checks"
you have in mind.
>>> >> >> -W
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> 2010/12/30 Benson Fung <benson.redhat(a)gmail.com>:
>>> >> >> > Hi,
>>> >> >> >
>>> >> >> > Can anyone know whether QA features can provide the
rule
>>> conflict
>>> >> >> > checks?
>>> >> >> >
>>> >> >> >
>>> >> >> > Thanks
>>> >> >> >
>>> >> >> > _______________________________________________
>>> >> >> > rules-users mailing list
>>> >> >> > rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
>>> >> >> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
>>> >> >> >
>>> >> >> >
>>> >> >> _______________________________________________
>>> >> >> rules-users mailing list
>>> >> >> rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
>>> >> >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
>>> >> >
>>> >> >
>>> >> >
>>> >> > --
>>> >> > Benson Fung
>>> >> > Solution Architect, Global Services, Greater China
>>> >> > | Redhat Hong Kong Limited || 45/F., The Lee Gardens, 33 Hysan
>>> Avenue,
>>> >> > Causeway Bay, Hong Kong || Office : 852-31802332 || Cell :
>>> 852-98369898
>>> >> > ||
>>> >> > benson.fung(a)redhat.com || http://www.hk.redhat.com||
>>> >> >
>>> >> > _______________________________________________
>>> >> > rules-users mailing list
>>> >> > rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
>>> >> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
>>> >> >
>>> >> >
>>> >>
>>> >> _______________________________________________
>>> >> rules-users mailing list
>>> >> rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
>>> >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > _______________________________________________
>>> > rules-users mailing list
>>> > rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
>>> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
>>> >
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> rules-users mailing list
>>> rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> rules-users mailing list
>> rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> rules-users mailing list
> rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
>
>
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
4:08 p.m.
We did a project where we developed a rule console to manage the
lifecycle of rules by managing unit-tests and scenario tests and
executing those on rule changes to ensure deployed rules pass the tests.
On 30/12/2010 15:03, Benson Fung wrote:
Yes, I tried QA analysis. But it only can find out the problems of
the individual rules like what you said. I tried to develop two rules
with sames conditions but different consequences and do the QA
analysis, it cannot detect it unfortunately. :(
2010/12/30 Esteban Aliverti <esteban.aliverti(a)gmail.com
<mailto:esteban.aliverti@gmail.com>>
I think QA analysis should find some of those problems. Did you
try it? As far as I know, it looks for range completeness, missing
gaps, etc.
Best Regards,
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Esteban Aliverti
- Developer @ http://www.plugtree.com <http://www.plugtree.com>
- Blog @ http://ilesteban.wordpress.com
2010/12/30 Wolfgang Laun <wolfgang.laun(a)gmail.com
<mailto:wolfgang.laun@gmail.com>>
The general case would be extremely difficult to solve. It
would require heavy expression manipulation. Consider a very
simple variation:
X($f: foo)
Y(bar == $f)
as compared to
Y($b: bar)
X(foo == $b)
And you can play this game at any level of complexity.
And even your "straightforward" case would require the
consideration of rule attributes, since there would not be a
conflict if they are in different agenda groups, etc.
-W
2010/12/30 Benson Fung <benson.redhat(a)gmail.com
<mailto:benson.redhat@gmail.com>>:
> The conflict is like :
>
> E.g.
> If (X = 90) then Score = 10;
> If (X = 90) then Score = 100;
>
> Can the BRMS detect this?
>
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 5:52 PM, Wolfgang Laun
<wolfgang.laun(a)gmail.com <mailto:wolfgang.laun@gmail.com>>
> wrote:
>>
>> Please define "conflict".
>> -W
>>
>> 2010/12/30 Benson Fung <benson.fung(a)redhat.com
<mailto:benson.fung@redhat.com>>:
>> > I would like to check if there is any conflict among the
created rules
>> > in
>> > the BRMS 5.1. Can the QA/Verify can check this out?
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 5:24 PM, Wolfgang Laun
<wolfgang.laun(a)gmail.com <mailto:wolfgang.laun@gmail.com>>
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Please don't assume that everybody knows which
"features" and
>> >> which "conflicts" and which "checks" you
have in mind.
>> >> -W
>> >>
>> >> 2010/12/30 Benson Fung <benson.redhat(a)gmail.com
<mailto:benson.redhat@gmail.com>>:
>> >> > Hi,
>> >> >
>> >> > Can anyone know whether QA features can provide the
rule conflict
>> >> > checks?
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > Thanks
>> >> >
>> >> > _______________________________________________
>> >> > rules-users mailing list
>> >> > rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
<mailto:rules-users@lists.jboss.org>
>> >> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> rules-users mailing list
>> >> rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
<mailto:rules-users@lists.jboss.org>
>> >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Benson Fung
>> > Solution Architect, Global Services, Greater China
>> > | Redhat Hong Kong Limited || 45/F., The Lee Gardens, 33
Hysan Avenue,
>> > Causeway Bay, Hong Kong || Office : 852-31802332 || Cell
: 852-98369898
>> > ||
>> > benson.fung(a)redhat.com <mailto:benson.fung@redhat.com> ||
http://www.hk.redhat.com||
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > rules-users mailing list
>> > rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
<mailto:rules-users@lists.jboss.org>
>> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
>> >
>> >
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> rules-users mailing list
>> rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
<mailto:rules-users@lists.jboss.org>
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> rules-users mailing list
> rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org <mailto:rules-users@lists.jboss.org>
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
>
>
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org <mailto:rules-users@lists.jboss.org>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org <mailto:rules-users@lists.jboss.org>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
10:43 a.m.
I would like to check if there is any conflict among the created rules in
the BRMS 5.1. Can the QA/Verify function button in BRMS can check this out?
On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 5:24 PM, Wolfgang Laun <wolfgang.laun(a)gmail.com>wrote:
Please don't assume that everybody knows which
"features" and
which "conflicts" and which "checks" you have in mind.
-W
2010/12/30 Benson Fung <benson.redhat(a)gmail.com>:
> Hi,
>
> Can anyone know whether QA features can provide the rule conflict checks?
>
>
> Thanks
>
> _______________________________________________
> rules-users mailing list
> rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
>
>
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
10:45 a.m.
Hi Wolfgang Laun,
QA features is a features in BRMS/Drools Guvnor. If you have opened up the
Drools Guvnor to take to look, you can see there is QA section at the left
hand side. Please try.
On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 5:24 PM, Wolfgang Laun <wolfgang.laun(a)gmail.com>wrote:
Please don't assume that everybody knows which
"features" and
which "conflicts" and which "checks" you have in mind.
-W
2010/12/30 Benson Fung <benson.redhat(a)gmail.com>:
> Hi,
>
> Can anyone know whether QA features can provide the rule conflict checks?
>
>
> Thanks
>
> _______________________________________________
> rules-users mailing list
> rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
>
>
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
6:05 p.m.
On 30/12/2010 08:53, Benson Fung wrote:
Hi,
Can anyone know whether QA features can provide the rule conflict checks?
http://community.jboss.org/wiki/DroolsVerifier
Mark
Thanks
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
6:12 p.m.
Hi Mark,
Do you have example how to use the DroolsVerifier? It is used at rule level
or at java level?
2010/12/31 Mark Proctor <mproctor(a)codehaus.org>
On 30/12/2010 08:53, Benson Fung wrote:
Hi,
Can anyone know whether QA features can provide the rule conflict checks?
http://community.jboss.org/wiki/DroolsVerifier
Mark
Thanks
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing
listrules-users@lists.jboss.orghttps://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
7:36 p.m.
On 30/12/2010 17:12, Benson Fung wrote:
Hi Mark,
Do you have example how to use the DroolsVerifier? It is used at rule
level or at java level?
2010/12/31 Mark Proctor <mproctor(a)codehaus.org
<mailto:mproctor@codehaus.org>>
On 30/12/2010 08:53, Benson Fung wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Can anyone know whether QA features can provide the rule conflict
> checks?
http://community.jboss.org/wiki/DroolsVerifier
Toni is verifier person and he's on xmas hols.
There is a java api and an ant task that wraps that. I don't think toni
has documented any of this, so you'd probably have to look at the ant
build file and ant task to figure it out.
Mark
Mark
>
>
> Thanks
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> rules-users mailing list
> rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org <mailto:rules-users@lists.jboss.org>
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org <mailto:rules-users@lists.jboss.org>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
7:39 p.m.
On 30/12/2010 18:36, Mark Proctor wrote:
On 30/12/2010 17:12, Benson Fung wrote:
> Hi Mark,
>
> Do you have example how to use the DroolsVerifier? It is used at
> rule level or at java level?
>
>
>
> 2010/12/31 Mark Proctor <mproctor(a)codehaus.org
> <mailto:mproctor@codehaus.org>>
>
> On 30/12/2010 08:53, Benson Fung wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Can anyone know whether QA features can provide the rule
>> conflict checks?
> http://community.jboss.org/wiki/DroolsVerifier
>
Toni is verifier person and he's on xmas hols.
There is a java api and an ant task that wraps that. I don't think
toni has documented any of this, so you'd probably have to look at the
ant build file and ant task to figure it out.
http://grepcode.com/file/repository.jboss.com/maven2/org.drools/drools-an...
Mark
>
>
> Mark
>
>>
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> rules-users mailing list
>> rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org <mailto:rules-users@lists.jboss.org>
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> rules-users mailing list
> rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org <mailto:rules-users@lists.jboss.org>
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> rules-users mailing list
> rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
12:02 p.m.
Hi,
You can use the ant task or use it on java level.
Here are some tests that show how:
https://github.com/droolsjbpm/droolsjbpm/blob/master/drools-verifier/src/...
I'll add more documentation to the wiki page.
Toni
On Dec 30, 2010, at 8:39 PM, Mark Proctor wrote:
On 30/12/2010 18:36, Mark Proctor wrote:
>
> On 30/12/2010 17:12, Benson Fung wrote:
>>
>> Hi Mark,
>>
>> Do you have example how to use the DroolsVerifier? It is used at rule level or
at java level?
>>
>>
>>
>> 2010/12/31 Mark Proctor <mproctor(a)codehaus.org>
>> On 30/12/2010 08:53, Benson Fung wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Can anyone know whether QA features can provide the rule conflict checks?
>> http://community.jboss.org/wiki/DroolsVerifier
> Toni is verifier person and he's on xmas hols.
>
> There is a java api and an ant task that wraps that. I don't think toni has
documented any of this, so you'd probably have to look at the ant build file and ant
task to figure it out.
http://grepcode.com/file/repository.jboss.com/maven2/org.drools/drools-an...
>
> Mark
>>
>> Mark
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> rules-users mailing list
>>> rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> rules-users mailing list
>> rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> rules-users mailing list
>> rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> rules-users mailing list
> rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
_______________________________________________
rules-users mailing list
rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
4861
days inactive
4865
days old
17 comments
7 participants
participants (7)
-
Benson Fung -
Benson Fung -
Corneil du Plessis -
Esteban Aliverti -
Mark Proctor -
Toni Rikkola -
Wolfgang Laun