[rules-dev] design thoughts: package configuration and asset loading API

[Michael Neale]

Kris - find attached - its not complete, but it will give you a start - very
simple.

Edson - I don't think the assembly of these file assets into a binary
package should be done in an IDE specific way - as we will want to do the
same from:

a) the repo
b) just an api or a directory?
c) a list of Reader objects, combined with each "asset type"

I am thinking
c) is the most generic - so we have an "assembly" api - of which the current
olde stuff is a simple subset:
eg: PackageAssembler.loadFrom(PackageConfig conf, RuleSource[] inputs)
    ....loadFrom(RuleSource ...) (for accumulating)

RuleSource is basically a Reader, plus some meta data to tell it if it is a
brl, or function, or rule, or dsl, or decision table, or whatever !
Then to satisfy a and b, and the IDE - we just have different adapters to
produce the RuleSource objects ?

Not sure if this should augment PackageBuilder or not - currently package
builder is kind of lower level, but I guess this could be part of it (but is
this API bloat? )
Basically it would feed the PackageBuilder api, so its really a front end of
sorts.

Thoughts ?

Mostly this package assembler would NOT be called directly by users - but by
tools (eg ant, IDE, repo deployer) that users use, whereas the
PackageBuilder is designed for use as it is now.

Michael.

On 3/7/07, Kris Verlaenen <kris.verlaenen at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Sure, seems doable.  Could you upload a zip containing a larger
> example maybe?  I was thinking about some rule files (one for each
> rule, syntax exactly like current drl?), which implicitly refer to
> stuff that is defined in the package file (imports, globals, anything
> else), functions (also in a separate file I assume), etc.
>
> So something to test the builder with: if I'm able to parse that set
> of files, the builder would be supporting all important features :)
>
> Kris
>
> On 3/6/07, Michael Neale <michael.neale at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Kris, I updated this JIRA:
> >
> > http://jira.jboss.com/jira/browse/JBRULES-568
> >
> > Can you take a look, tell me if it makes sense, and if its doable.
> Probably
> > could be split into 2 if you like (one for DroolsBuilder, one for the
> GUI).
> > This is critical for BRMS integration, BUT, it is useful even without a
> BRMS
> > (eg this GUI coudl provide a hook to fire of the ant task to compile the
> > rules into a deployable binary package).
> >
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/rules-dev/attachments/20070310/9e03dcab/attachment.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: MyRulePackage.zip
Type: application/zip
Size: 3232 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/rules-dev/attachments/20070310/9e03dcab/attachment.zip