[rules-users] "in" syntax breaking the Rete Tree

[Mark Proctor]

We don’t know it’s a bug, without actually testing it, that takes time.

We prefer for the community to try supporting itself.

There are numerous other people on this list, not employees of Red Hat, who if they have the time and inclination, can also verify and confirm if it’s a bug or not.

Red Hat core developer time is limited, so we prefer the community to support it self, which it generally does extremely well - thanks to the efforts of some valiant individuals. In fact it’s often hard to tell who is and who is not employed by Red Hat, because of the success of our community - as you yourself found. And this is the way it should be, the less differentiation we can make between RHT people and non-RHT people, the better it is for  everyone, and the healthier the project.

I and others have no interest in you venting your personal frustrations against a group of people who all work very hard; we make that clear so you and others don’t continue to abuse the hard working people in our open source communities. Keep your arguments technical, and avoid embellishing your emails with frustrations that make demands of people and communities for which you have no right. Which you still continue to do
> All you or one of your team members had to do was to reply to my original
> post with four words only:


So I repeat my offer, which you have not taken up yet. If you want that level of service, then I can have someone from sales contact you. You will then have our undivided attention, with service level agreements, and time monitored interactions. Your suspected bugs and issues will be verified, promptly, by a crack team and your waiting time kept to a minimum.

Mark


On 24 Feb 2014, at 14:51, droolster <quant.coder at gmail.com> wrote:

> @Mark,
> 
> Thank you for your rant. When you get off your 'high-horse', you may want to
> consider the point which I was trying to make all along which is:
> 
> All you or one of your team members had to do was to reply to my original
> post with four words only:
> 
> "This is a bug".
> 
> This would have saved a lot of your precious time and effort which you
> mention. It certainly is a lot quicker than writing your current heroic post
> and the repeated posts made by @laune. This would have cleared up my
> confusion as I did not know there was a disconnect between the code written
> in the text editor tab and the Rete Viewer tab. As far as I know, this fact
> is not documented anywhere either. If you had done that, I would have been
> satisfied and I could explain to others that this is a bug instead of "I
> don't know" and Drools Expert looking like a below enterprise-level product.
> 
> I originally posted this bug on StackExchange so that I would capture a
> wider audience and get faster help but it was at the request of @laune that
> StackExchange was not the right place and that I should post it on this
> forum, which I duly did.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --
> View this message in context: http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/in-operator-breaking-the-Rete-Tree-tp4028148p4028269.html
> Sent from the Drools: User forum mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> _______________________________________________
> rules-users mailing list
> rules-users at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users