Thank you for the notice.

> ./drools-compiler/src/main/resources/META-INF/drools-4.0.xsd
> ./drools-compiler/src/main/resources/META-INF/drools-5.2.xsd

This is for rules in xml format. The feature is very old and not
documented. I think we can deprecate and drop.

Filed https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-drools/issues/6159

> ./drools-compiler/src/main/resources/META-INF/drools-processes-5.0.xsd

This is for .rf file (rule flow). It's no longer supported since drools 8.
We should clean-up it.

Filed https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-drools/issues/6160

Thanks,
Toshiya


On Tue, Nov 19, 2024 at 10:16 AM Alex Porcelli <a...@porcelli.me> wrote:

> Ohh what the following XSD formats? They might not be directly related
> to parser, but it's in the same problem domain I think.
>
> ./drools-compiler/src/main/resources/META-INF/drools-4.0.xsd
> ./drools-compiler/src/main/resources/META-INF/drools-5.2.xsd
> ./drools-compiler/src/main/resources/META-INF/drools-processes-5.0.xsd
>
> On Mon, Nov 18, 2024 at 5:35 AM Alex Porcelli <a...@porcelli.me> wrote:
> >
> > Thank you for the clarification and the confirmation that the
> > DRL6_STRICT enforces the `more correct` form.
> >
> > I wonder if in the effort to remove ambiguities in the DRL10 parser,
> > is the DRL6_STRICT incorporated or the DRL6 mode (not strict) used?
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Nov 18, 2024 at 2:40 AM Toshiya Kobayashi
> > <toshiyakobaya...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Could you clarify what's exactly the difference between DRL6 Strict
> > > > and DRL parsers? Probably the wording STRICT is confusing me, as
> > > > usually this term is used to enforce best practices.
> > >
> > > DRL6_STRICT means "supports strictly typed annotation".
> > >
> > > DRL6_STRICT parser requires FQCN annotations which need to be resolved
> by
> > > classloader while DRL6 parser accepts String based annotation names.
> Also
> > > the annotation position is different (In DRL6_STRICT, annotation is
> placed
> > > before its target declaration. In DRL6, annotation is placed after its
> > > target declaration). There is no difference other than annotation.
> > >
> > > For example)
> > >
> > > DRL6_STRICT:
> > >
> > > import org.example.Xyz;
> > >
> > > @Xyz rule R1
> > >   when
> > >   then
> > > end
> > >
> > > DRL6:
> > >
> > > // no need of import for Xyz
> > >
> > > rule R1 @Xyz
> > >   when
> > >   then
> > > end
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Toshiya
> > >
> > > On Sun, Nov 17, 2024 at 8:31 PM Alex Porcelli <a...@porcelli.me>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Thank you for the clarifications, Thoshiya.
> > > >
> > > > Could you clarify what's exactly the difference between DRL6 Strict
> > > > and DRL parsers? Probably the wording STRICT is confusing me, as
> > > > usually this term is used to enforce best practices.
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Nov 12, 2024 at 10:28 PM Toshiya Kobayashi
> > > > <toshiyakobaya...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Thank you very much for the reply, Alex.
> > > > >
> > > > > I totally agree with user communication and gradual approach.
> > > > >
> > > > > Btw, "Strict mode" and "legacy mode" likely don't fit well with the
> > > > parser
> > > > > architecture.
> > > > >
> > > > > One parser implementation is tied to one LanguageLevelOption.
> > > > >
> > > > > In the current codebase,
> > > > >
> > > > > The new parser -> DRL6
> > > > > The old DRL6 parser -> DRL6
> > > > > The old DRL6_STRICT parser -> DRL6_STRICT
> > > > > The old DRL5 parser -> DRL5
> > > > >
> > > > > (Sorry, I haven't mentioned the old DRL6_STRICT/DRL5 parsers
> before, but
> > > > > they exist)
> > > > >
> > > > > But the proposal is
> > > > >
> > > > > The new parser -> DRL10
> > > > > The old DRL6 parser -> DRL6
> > > > > The old DRL6_STRICT parser -> DRL6_STRICT
> > > > > The old DRL5 parser -> DRL5
> > > > >
> > > > > and considering the migration plan.
> > > > >
> > > > > You seem to assume that the new parser can handle all DRL5, DRL6
> and
> > > > DRL10.
> > > > > But it can't.
> > > > >
> > > > > The new parser (DRL10) is itself "strict mode" and the old DRL6
> parser is
> > > > > itself "legacy mode". Users can choose any parser as long as they
> exist.
> > > > >
> > > > > So the point is how we will provide warnings.
> > > > >
> > > > > 1. Introduce the new parser(DRL10), but make it optional (not
> enabled by
> > > > > default).
> > > > > 2. Raise warnings when the syntax to be dropped are used **in the
> old
> > > > DRL6
> > > > > parser**, saying these syntax are deprecated.
> > > > >    Raise warnings when DRL5 and DRL6_STRICT are used, saying these
> > > > language
> > > > > levels are deprecated.
> > > > > <six months later>
> > > > > 3. Raise warnings when DRL6 is used, saying DRL10 will be the
> default in
> > > > > the future
> > > > > <six months later>
> > > > > 4. Make the new parser(DRL10) default
> > > > > <xxx months later>
> > > > > 5. In the next major release (version 11), drop the old DRL5 and
> > > > > DRL6_STRICT parsers
> > > > > <xxx months later>
> > > > > 6. In the major release after that (version 12), drop the old DRL6
> > > > parser,
> > > > > it means the deprecated syntax cannot be used at this point.
> > > > >
> > > > > How does it sound?
> > > > >
> > > > > Additional points:
> > > > > Until step 3, probably most community users are not aware of the
> new
> > > > > parser(DRL10) even if documented. We may promote it in the
> community and
> > > > > collect feedback.
> > > > >
> > > > > > Additionally, I think eval should be handled differently. It
> needs its
> > > > > > own thread and likely more discussion, as well as a clear and
> careful
> > > > > > communication plan for its deprecation.
> > > > >
> > > > > Agreed.
> > > > >
> > > > > > Finally, I’d recommend including a migration tool as part of
> this plan
> > > > > > to help users transition more smoothly.
> > > > >
> > > > > Agreed.
> > > > >
> > > > > Regards,
> > > > > Toshiya
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, Nov 12, 2024 at 9:41 PM Alex Porcelli <a...@porcelli.me>
> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Thank you, Toshyia for the proposal!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I have a concern about making these changes without the proper
> > > > > > communication channels in place. We agreed a while back to focus
> on
> > > > > > the release first and address communication afterward.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Once the communication plan is sorted out, I suggest a more
> gradual
> > > > > > approach to introduce the new parser:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > - First, introduce the new parser, but make it optional (not
> enabled
> > > > > > by default). Start by showing warnings for any syntax that will
> be
> > > > > > removed, including v5 syntax.
> > > > > > - About six months later, add warnings for users not yet using
> the new
> > > > > > parser, and introduce a "strict mode" (which won’t be enabled by
> > > > > > default).
> > > > > > - Another six months later, set the new parser as the default.
> > > > > > - Enable strict mode by default.
> > > > > > - In the next major release (version 11), adopt the new parser
> as the
> > > > > > default and remove old syntaxes. Add a "legacy mode" to support
> older
> > > > > > syntaxes, with warnings for their use, and drop v5 syntax.
> > > > > > - In the major release after that (version 12), completely
> remove all
> > > > > > old syntaxes.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Additionally, I think eval should be handled differently. It
> needs its
> > > > > > own thread and likely more discussion, as well as a clear and
> careful
> > > > > > communication plan for its deprecation.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Finally, I’d recommend including a migration tool as part of
> this plan
> > > > > > to help users transition more smoothly.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Alex
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Tue, Nov 12, 2024 at 12:26 AM Toshiya Kobayashi
> > > > > > <toshiyakobaya...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hello,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > We have merged a new Antlr4 based DRL parser in the drools main
> > > > branch.
> > > > > > > It's not enabled by default, so it doesn't affect users now.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > The new parser has been focused on backward compatibility and
> > > > existing
> > > > > > unit
> > > > > > > tests are all green with it.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > However, at this point, we can take an opportunity to "slim
> down DRL
> > > > > > > syntax" in order to improve the future maintainability of
> drools.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > PROPOSAL is
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > - Drop or modify some DRL syntax, which cause maintenance cost
> and/or
> > > > > > > ambiguity and/or are less useful.
> > > > > > > - Introduce LanguageLevelOption.DRL10 for the new syntax.
> Enabled
> > > > when
> > > > > > > configured. It is handled by the new parser.
> > > > > > > - Announce "deprecate" for the dropped syntax, so that users
> can
> > > > migrate
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > > DRL10.
> > > > > > > - At some point in the future, make LanguageLevelOption.DRL10
> > > > default.
> > > > > > > (Still keep DRL6 and the old parser as a transition period)
> > > > > > > - When we consider the new parser is mature, we will remove
> DRL6 and
> > > > the
> > > > > > > old parser
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Further details and candidates syntax to drop are written in
> this
> > > > docs.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Ibmj-koAMbeaungHuFeQtw2zD03YJcNJkJ-kdN8ugks/edit?usp=sharing
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Feel free to add comments on the docs. Discussing this on the
> thread
> > > > is
> > > > > > > also great.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thanks!
> > > > > > > Toshiya
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@kie.apache.org
> > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@kie.apache.org
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@kie.apache.org
> > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@kie.apache.org
> > > >
> > > >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@kie.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@kie.apache.org
>
>

Reply via email to