You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@geronimo.apache.org by Chris Perrin <cp...@hifiit.com> on 2003/10/30 17:17:42 UTC
JSR94
Because the JSR94 spec clearly specifies the use of J2EE as a target for
running a rules engine, has anyone given any thoughts for providing a rules
engine implementation that runs natively in Geronimo?
Obviously something like this would be a service that the user would have to
configure, but it might be useful to Geronimo users to have a JSR94
compliant rules engine ready to go "out of the box." If we ensured strict
JSR94 compliance, then we could keep people from locking into a
Geronimo-specific implementation if they wanted to migrate to another
platform. The rules engine might also have a standalone component which
someone could use if they thought a Geronimo might be overkill for some
projects.
If anyone thinks this is a worthwhile idea, I'll start cranking out some
code.
Chris
Re: JSR94
Posted by Jules Gosnell <ju...@coredevelopers.net>.
James Strachan wrote:
>
> On Thursday, October 30, 2003, at 04:32 pm, Chris Perrin wrote:
>
>> Sorry to be obtuse, but does that mean:
>>
>> a) Drools already does this or
>
>
> Yes. AFAIK drools already is JSR 94 compliant and has the basics of a
> JCA connector implementation (which may need some work).
>
>
>> b) It might be interesting to enable drools to run with Geronimo?
>
>
> Or to say that another way, we should try embedding drools into
> Geronimo, either as MBeans or as a JCA connector. I can imagine
> there's some work required to cleanly integrate the two - if you fancy
> diving in and helping. Then we could start using rules to manage
> Geronimo itself which would be really cool.
This is something that I have thought a little bit about.
Tuning an appserver is a nightmare. I want a Geronimo cluster to be
self-organising, self-healing and self-tuning ! A rules-based tuning
mechanism might be the next natural step to take on top of current
management standards. We just have to make sure that Geronimo components
expose enough information that a rules based administrator could get a
good grip on them...
Jules
>
> James
> -------
> http://radio.weblogs.com/0112098/
>
--
/*************************************
* Jules Gosnell
* Partner
* Core Developers Network (Europe)
* http://www.coredevelopers.net
*************************************/
RE: JSR94
Posted by Jeremy Boynes <je...@coredevelopers.net>.
I would suggest JCA rather than a pure MBean - if there is already some JCA
support in drools it may be easier and then the solution would not be
Geronimo specific.
--
Jeremy
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chris Perrin [mailto:cplists@hifiit.com]
> Sent: Thursday, October 30, 2003 8:50 AM
> To: geronimo-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: JSR94
>
>
> OK, I'll see what I can do about setting drools up as an MBean. Nothing
> like sticking my head in a noose. :)
>
> Chris
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "James Strachan" <ja...@yahoo.co.uk>
> To: <ge...@incubator.apache.org>
> Sent: Thursday, October 30, 2003 10:43 AM
> Subject: Re: JSR94
>
>
> >
> > On Thursday, October 30, 2003, at 04:32 pm, Chris Perrin wrote:
> >
> > > Sorry to be obtuse, but does that mean:
> > >
> > > a) Drools already does this or
> >
> > Yes. AFAIK drools already is JSR 94 compliant and has the basics of a
> > JCA connector implementation (which may need some work).
> >
> >
> > > b) It might be interesting to enable drools to run with Geronimo?
> >
> > Or to say that another way, we should try embedding drools into
> > Geronimo, either as MBeans or as a JCA connector. I can imagine there's
> > some work required to cleanly integrate the two - if you fancy diving
> > in and helping. Then we could start using rules to manage Geronimo
> > itself which would be really cool.
> >
> > James
> > -------
> > http://radio.weblogs.com/0112098/
> >
>
>
Re: JSR94
Posted by James Strachan <ja...@yahoo.co.uk>.
On Thursday, October 30, 2003, at 04:49 pm, Chris Perrin wrote:
> OK, I'll see what I can do about setting drools up as an MBean.
> Nothing
> like sticking my head in a noose. :)
:) great stuff. Good luck - let us know how you get on.
Incidentally I think there's an example of integrating with JBoss in
the drools CVS using JCA - it might be worth looking at how that works
& seeing if we could do something similar.
James
-------
http://radio.weblogs.com/0112098/
Re: JSR94
Posted by Chris Perrin <cp...@hifiit.com>.
OK, I'll see what I can do about setting drools up as an MBean. Nothing
like sticking my head in a noose. :)
Chris
----- Original Message -----
From: "James Strachan" <ja...@yahoo.co.uk>
To: <ge...@incubator.apache.org>
Sent: Thursday, October 30, 2003 10:43 AM
Subject: Re: JSR94
>
> On Thursday, October 30, 2003, at 04:32 pm, Chris Perrin wrote:
>
> > Sorry to be obtuse, but does that mean:
> >
> > a) Drools already does this or
>
> Yes. AFAIK drools already is JSR 94 compliant and has the basics of a
> JCA connector implementation (which may need some work).
>
>
> > b) It might be interesting to enable drools to run with Geronimo?
>
> Or to say that another way, we should try embedding drools into
> Geronimo, either as MBeans or as a JCA connector. I can imagine there's
> some work required to cleanly integrate the two - if you fancy diving
> in and helping. Then we could start using rules to manage Geronimo
> itself which would be really cool.
>
> James
> -------
> http://radio.weblogs.com/0112098/
>
Re: JSR94
Posted by James Strachan <ja...@yahoo.co.uk>.
On Thursday, October 30, 2003, at 04:32 pm, Chris Perrin wrote:
> Sorry to be obtuse, but does that mean:
>
> a) Drools already does this or
Yes. AFAIK drools already is JSR 94 compliant and has the basics of a
JCA connector implementation (which may need some work).
> b) It might be interesting to enable drools to run with Geronimo?
Or to say that another way, we should try embedding drools into
Geronimo, either as MBeans or as a JCA connector. I can imagine there's
some work required to cleanly integrate the two - if you fancy diving
in and helping. Then we could start using rules to manage Geronimo
itself which would be really cool.
James
-------
http://radio.weblogs.com/0112098/
Re: JSR94
Posted by Chris Perrin <cp...@hifiit.com>.
Sorry to be obtuse, but does that mean:
a) Drools already does this or
b) It might be interesting to enable drools to run with Geronimo?
Chris
----- Original Message -----
From: "James Strachan" <ja...@yahoo.co.uk>
To: <ge...@incubator.apache.org>
Sent: Thursday, October 30, 2003 10:26 AM
Subject: Re: JSR94
> On Thursday, October 30, 2003, at 04:23 pm, Ludovic Maître wrote:
> > I'm pretty new to the Geronimo project but perhaps peoples want to use
> > drools from codehaus since it is developed by some of the developer of
> > geronimo, ins't it ?
>
> Agreed - drools rocks
>
> http://drools.codehaus.org/
>
>
> > Chris Perrin wrote:
> >
> >> Because the JSR94 spec clearly specifies the use of J2EE as a target
> >> for
> >> running a rules engine, has anyone given any thoughts for providing a
> >> rules
> >> engine implementation that runs natively in Geronimo?
> >>
> >> Obviously something like this would be a service that the user would
> >> have to
> >> configure, but it might be useful to Geronimo users to have a JSR94
> >> compliant rules engine ready to go "out of the box." If we ensured
> >> strict
> >> JSR94 compliance, then we could keep people from locking into a
> >> Geronimo-specific implementation if they wanted to migrate to another
> >> platform. The rules engine might also have a standalone component
> >> which
> >> someone could use if they thought a Geronimo might be overkill for
> >> some
> >> projects.
> >>
> >> If anyone thinks this is a worthwhile idea, I'll start cranking out
> >> some
> >> code.
>
> Why not just contribute to drools?
>
> James
> -------
> http://radio.weblogs.com/0112098/
>
Re: JSR94
Posted by James Strachan <ja...@yahoo.co.uk>.
On Thursday, October 30, 2003, at 04:23 pm, Ludovic Maître wrote:
> I'm pretty new to the Geronimo project but perhaps peoples want to use
> drools from codehaus since it is developed by some of the developer of
> geronimo, ins't it ?
Agreed - drools rocks
http://drools.codehaus.org/
> Chris Perrin wrote:
>
>> Because the JSR94 spec clearly specifies the use of J2EE as a target
>> for
>> running a rules engine, has anyone given any thoughts for providing a
>> rules
>> engine implementation that runs natively in Geronimo?
>>
>> Obviously something like this would be a service that the user would
>> have to
>> configure, but it might be useful to Geronimo users to have a JSR94
>> compliant rules engine ready to go "out of the box." If we ensured
>> strict
>> JSR94 compliance, then we could keep people from locking into a
>> Geronimo-specific implementation if they wanted to migrate to another
>> platform. The rules engine might also have a standalone component
>> which
>> someone could use if they thought a Geronimo might be overkill for
>> some
>> projects.
>>
>> If anyone thinks this is a worthwhile idea, I'll start cranking out
>> some
>> code.
Why not just contribute to drools?
James
-------
http://radio.weblogs.com/0112098/
Re: JSR94
Posted by James Richards <he...@yahoo.com>.
We took a look at droolz for a rules engine and it is
a good solution...I do know that previously droolz was
under www.werken.com but now it seems to be under
codehaus and there seem to have been licensing changes
for at least some of the projects...
Droolz would be a nice choice...
> I'm pretty new to the Geronimo project but perhaps
> peoples want to use
> drools from codehaus since it is developed by some
> of the developer of
> geronimo, ins't it ?
>
> Chris Perrin wrote:
>
> >Because the JSR94 spec clearly specifies the use of
> J2EE as a target for
> >running a rules engine, has anyone given any
> thoughts for providing a rules
> >engine implementation that runs natively in
> Geronimo?
> >
> >Obviously something like this would be a service
> that the user would have to
> >configure, but it might be useful to Geronimo users
> to have a JSR94
> >compliant rules engine ready to go "out of the
> box." If we ensured strict
> >JSR94 compliance, then we could keep people from
> locking into a
> >Geronimo-specific implementation if they wanted to
> migrate to another
> >platform. The rules engine might also have a
> standalone component which
> >someone could use if they thought a Geronimo might
> be overkill for some
> >projects.
> >
> >If anyone thinks this is a worthwhile idea, I'll
> start cranking out some
> >code.
> >
> >Chris
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Exclusive Video Premiere - Britney Spears
http://launch.yahoo.com/promos/britneyspears/
Re: JSR94
Posted by Ludovic Maître <lu...@free.fr>.
I'm pretty new to the Geronimo project but perhaps peoples want to use
drools from codehaus since it is developed by some of the developer of
geronimo, ins't it ?
Chris Perrin wrote:
>Because the JSR94 spec clearly specifies the use of J2EE as a target for
>running a rules engine, has anyone given any thoughts for providing a rules
>engine implementation that runs natively in Geronimo?
>
>Obviously something like this would be a service that the user would have to
>configure, but it might be useful to Geronimo users to have a JSR94
>compliant rules engine ready to go "out of the box." If we ensured strict
>JSR94 compliance, then we could keep people from locking into a
>Geronimo-specific implementation if they wanted to migrate to another
>platform. The rules engine might also have a standalone component which
>someone could use if they thought a Geronimo might be overkill for some
>projects.
>
>If anyone thinks this is a worthwhile idea, I'll start cranking out some
>code.
>
>Chris
>
>
>
>
>