[rules-users] RE: [rules-dev] Rule-Flow in Rules 4.0 M2 and ruleFlowGroups

[Anstis, Michael (M.)]

Have you set the RuleFlowId of the Rule Flow you're designing?

Click on the white background and change the RuleFlowId in the properties view. 

This is the Id of the RuleFlow to invoke with startProcess(<RuleFlowId>).

Any rules with "ruleflow-group" attribute set to match those in your RuleFlow will execute.

Any rules without a "ruleflow-group" attribute set will execute on FireAllRules().

I hope this solves your problem.

CC'ed to Users Group for information.

-----Original Message-----
From: rules-dev-bounces at lists.jboss.org [mailto:rules-dev-bounces at lists.jboss.org] On Behalf Of Mahler, Bjoern (EXTERN: LINEAS)
Sent: 14 May 2007 12:18
To: rules-dev at lists.jboss.org
Subject: [rules-dev] Rule-Flow in Rules 4.0 M2 and ruleFlowGroups

Hello...

I don't know whether it's a bug or something else... - i'm currently
evaluating the new version m2 and especially the rule-flow feature, which
would be the yet missing part for us to use drools. 

So after creating a testflow.rf with your editor i've put the created
.rfm-file in the context as sugested on the blog/release-notes:
processBuilder.addProcessFromFile(new
InputStreamReader(DroolsTest.class.getResourceAsStream( "/testflow.rfm" ) )
);

After invoking the rules with workingMemory.startProcess("test"); and/or
workingMemory.fireAllRules(); nothing happened... A look in the sources and
the rfm-xml-file shows, that the element <ruleFlowGroup> is empty! I would
have expected the name of the group at this point... After changing this to
the desired string, the behaviour looks more expecting ;)

The problem is, that the .rfm file is regenerated after editing the rf-file
so changes to that will be lost...

Is it a bug or did i something wrong?

TIA
Björn

_______________________________________________
rules-dev mailing list
rules-dev at lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev