Drools has been backwards compatible since 2006. We'll provide migration paths, but we cannot guarantee backwards computability indefinitely.
For instance in the case of DSLs, if we were to drop them, we could provide a migrate script that rendered them all to pure drl (without any remaining DSL) so that they would continue to be executable. Mark On 29 Jan 2013, at 06:33, Ansgar Konermann <[email protected]> wrote: > I value source code compatibility much higher than a guided editor. We do all > out rules editing in a plain text editor. > > But we absolutely need the certainty that we can compile and run our existing > mortgage scoring rules for our mission-critical system with the next major > version of drools. > > After all, rules also are what they are termed in Guvnor: assets. Please > protect my assets. > > Thanks > > Ansgar > > Am 29.01.2013 00:08 schrieb "Mark Proctor" <[email protected]>: > How would people feel if we removed DSLs from 6.0? There is no decision > either way, but I wanted to see if people liked or disliked the idea. > > My reason for this is I don't believe DSLs in their current form, beyond demo > ware, are useful. They need a lot more work to turn them into guided > structured documents, we don't have the people to focus on that right now, > and no one from the community has taken this on. > > I'd rather see them removed, until they can be done properly. > > Mark > _______________________________________________ > rules-dev mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev > _______________________________________________ > rules-dev mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev
_______________________________________________ rules-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev
