From: Kevin C. <Kev...@or...> - 2003-01-31 16:32:48
|
> Do you know of JEOPS (sourceforge)? It was the only rules engine I > could find that had a reasonable license. Did you look at mandarax? Kev Kevin Conner This is a personal e-mail. Any views or opinions presented are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Orchard Information Systems Ltd. |
From: David J. <dav...@di...> - 2003-01-31 17:50:46
|
I'm looking now, this is very interesting! Thanks! david jencks On Friday, January 31, 2003, at 11:30 AM, Kevin Conner wrote: >> Do you know of JEOPS (sourceforge)? It was the only rules engine I >> could find that had a reasonable license. > > Did you look at mandarax? > > Kev > > Kevin Conner > This is a personal e-mail. Any views or opinions presented are > solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those > of Orchard Information Systems Ltd. > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.NET email is sponsored by: > SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See! > http://www.vasoftware.com > _______________________________________________ > Jboss-development mailing list > Jbo...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development > |
From: Brett S. <br...@mo...> - 2003-02-01 19:21:54
|
Also look at drools, http://drools.org/index.html On Fri, 31 Jan 2003, David Jencks wrote: > I'm looking now, this is very interesting! > > Thanks! > > david jencks > > On Friday, January 31, 2003, at 11:30 AM, Kevin Conner wrote: > > >> Do you know of JEOPS (sourceforge)? It was the only rules engine I > >> could find that had a reasonable license. > > > > Did you look at mandarax? > > > > Kev > > > > Kevin Conner > > This is a personal e-mail. Any views or opinions presented are > > solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those > > of Orchard Information Systems Ltd. |
From: jora <jo...@ka...> - 2003-02-02 02:52:05
|
OK This is a list I'll check: http://drools.org/index.html http://sourceforge.net/projects/clipscpp http://sourceforge.net/projects/jeops/ http://sourceforge.net/projects/mandarax/ http://sourceforge.net/projects/jxbre/ http://sourceforge.net/projects/snort/ http://sourceforge.net/projects/ofbiz/ http://sourceforge.net/projects/bfre/ http://sourceforge.net/projects/foursuite/ http://sourceforge.net/projects/macker/ I plan (as David suggested): > I'm very interested in what you have in mind for a rules engine. I > once integrated JEOPS into jboss as an interceptor: ejb invocations are > supplied to the rules engine on the way down and on return. I made to take one of thouse above (madarax or jeops) and write an interceptor. Here I want to separate JBoss internals and Rules Engine. So, it could be used as a fancy logger - all calls to the container are intercepted and rules set desides for 'what' info to log 'where'. This approach may fire messages - current use case (I aim for) must exclude any effect on current call thread. Next iteration would be some helper (framework) for ACL. I guess Rules here are appropriate thing to do the right job. For me, one of the most exiting ideas is to implement EJB Container as a Rules Engine Wrapper and have interceptors string as Rhs of Rules. This way we have Aspects (aspects are interceptors in JBoss, right?) as Rhs and Aspect Query as Lhs. We have flexible system because of Rules nature. For speed there are 2 issues: 1) Rules internals must be derivatives of Rete II (does anyone knows what is the exact algorithm - not the idea only?) which may incorporate index usage for example. 2) Compiling it to the java bytecodes might benefit - the changes in the rule set possible only at the deployment time (when I think about distributed peering servers then this is possible not only at the deployment time). What touches the science the friend of mine told me is: (actually he saw this alive for C++) It's possible to write compiler/checker which could reveal dull points where the rules clashes. Then the human will deside that this is ok just checker had no info about Rhs internals (they written in native code for example) or will take appropriate corrections. That's it! I'm excited! If you have comments on any issues here please include me in recipients list explicitely. Currently I'm subscribed to jbo...@li... But yesterday I did not received mail from Kevin and David. Thanx Brett, he included :) I'll investigate this. Anyway, If I'll not respond and you think I should, please resend me the letter. David, if you don't mind: > closure. The original implementation won't work with current jboss, I > have a partially functional replacement (this is currently inaccessible > due to hardware problems, but I hope it will be recoverable). I'd love > to collaborate on getting it to work again if you are interested. share with me please (mail me if size <100kb) your work on JEOPS. Note :) that if you take trouble to make this thing work the first iteration I just planned will be done. Thanx jora ----- Original Message ----- From: "Brett Sealey" <br...@mo...> To: <jbo...@li...> Sent: Saturday, February 01, 2003 8:21 PM Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] RE: Are you in functional programming and JSR94? How can I join this? > Also look at drools, http://drools.org/index.html > > On Fri, 31 Jan 2003, David Jencks wrote: > > > I'm looking now, this is very interesting! > > > > Thanks! > > > > david jencks > > > > On Friday, January 31, 2003, at 11:30 AM, Kevin Conner wrote: > > > > >> Do you know of JEOPS (sourceforge)? It was the only rules engine I > > >> could find that had a reasonable license. > > > > > > Did you look at mandarax? > > > > > > Kev > > > > > > Kevin Conner |
From: Holger B. <ho...@bi...> - 2003-02-02 04:03:19
|
http://sourceforge.net/projects/ofbiz/ is my bet bax Am Sonntag, 02.02.03, um 04:46 Uhr (Europe/Budapest) schrieb jora: > OK > This is a list I'll check: > http://drools.org/index.html > http://sourceforge.net/projects/clipscpp > http://sourceforge.net/projects/jeops/ > http://sourceforge.net/projects/mandarax/ > http://sourceforge.net/projects/jxbre/ > http://sourceforge.net/projects/snort/ > http://sourceforge.net/projects/ofbiz/ > http://sourceforge.net/projects/bfre/ > http://sourceforge.net/projects/foursuite/ > http://sourceforge.net/projects/macker/ > > > I plan (as David suggested): > >> I'm very interested in what you have in mind for a rules engine. I >> once integrated JEOPS into jboss as an interceptor: ejb invocations >> are >> supplied to the rules engine on the way down and on return. I made > > to take one of thouse above (madarax or jeops) and write an > interceptor. > Here I want to separate JBoss internals and Rules Engine. > So, it could be used as a fancy logger - all calls to the container are > intercepted and rules set desides for 'what' info to log 'where'. > This approach may fire messages - current use case (I aim for) > must exclude any effect on current call thread. > > Next iteration would be some helper (framework) for ACL. > I guess Rules here are appropriate thing to do the right job. > > For me, one of the most exiting ideas is to implement EJB Container > as a Rules Engine Wrapper and have interceptors string as Rhs of Rules. > This way we have Aspects (aspects are interceptors in JBoss, right?) > as Rhs and Aspect Query as Lhs. We have flexible system because > of Rules nature. For speed there are 2 issues: > 1) Rules internals must be derivatives of Rete II > (does anyone knows what is the exact algorithm - not the idea only?) > which may incorporate index usage for example. > 2) Compiling it to the java bytecodes might benefit - the changes > in the rule set possible only at the deployment time (when I think > about distributed peering servers then this is possible not only at the > deployment time). > > What touches the science the friend of mine told me is: > (actually he saw this alive for C++) > It's possible to write compiler/checker which could reveal > dull points where the rules clashes. Then the human will > deside that > this is ok just checker had no info about Rhs internals > (they written in native code for example) > or will take appropriate corrections. > That's it! I'm excited! > > If you have comments on any issues here please > include me in recipients list explicitely. > > Currently I'm subscribed to > jbo...@li... > But yesterday I did not received mail > from Kevin and David. Thanx Brett, > he included :) > I'll investigate this. Anyway, > If I'll not respond and you think > I should, please resend me the letter. > > David, if you don't mind: >> closure. The original implementation won't work with current jboss, I >> have a partially functional replacement (this is currently >> inaccessible >> due to hardware problems, but I hope it will be recoverable). I'd >> love >> to collaborate on getting it to work again if you are interested. > share with me please (mail me if size <100kb) your work on JEOPS. > Note :) that if you take trouble to make this thing work the first > iteration > I just planned will be done. > > Thanx > jora > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Brett Sealey" <br...@mo...> > To: <jbo...@li...> > Sent: Saturday, February 01, 2003 8:21 PM > Subject: Re: [JBoss-dev] RE: Are you in functional programming and > JSR94? > How can I join this? > > >> Also look at drools, http://drools.org/index.html >> >> On Fri, 31 Jan 2003, David Jencks wrote: >> >>> I'm looking now, this is very interesting! >>> >>> Thanks! >>> >>> david jencks >>> >>> On Friday, January 31, 2003, at 11:30 AM, Kevin Conner wrote: >>> >>>>> Do you know of JEOPS (sourceforge)? It was the only rules engine I >>>>> could find that had a reasonable license. >>>> >>>> Did you look at mandarax? >>>> >>>> Kev >>>> >>>> Kevin Conner > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.NET email is sponsored by: > SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See! > http://www.vasoftware.com > _______________________________________________ > Jboss-development mailing list > Jbo...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development > |