If code-gen is required, don’t we have a chicken-egg problem? How users can use an API that will be generated in the future?
- Alex On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 12:47 PM Enrique Gonzalez Martinez < elguard...@gmail.com> wrote: > The kie api is a library inside the runtimes project and the implementation > of the start is in jbpm-flow project. Related to the process definition > requires codegen. > > El mar, 21 ene 2025, 18:15, Alex Porcelli <a...@porcelli.me> escribió: > > > Thank you for the reference, Enrique. > > > > But how is this API supposed to work? I mean… it’s part of the codegen > > (during build) that the Model class is generated for the current project. > > > > - > > Alex > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 10:06 AM Enrique Gonzalez Martinez < > > elguard...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > This is an example... Even if you are a listener this should be the > > > endpoint. For some reason internal api and exposed api became > > > entangled at some point so even if you go low code if you want > > > persistence it should be like this. > > > > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/kiegroup/kogito-runtimes/blob/main/jbpm/jbpm-tests/src/test/java/org/jbpm/bpmn2/ActivityTest.java#L233-L234 > > > > > > El mar, 21 ene 2025 a las 10:10, Toshiya Kobayashi > > > (<toshiyakobaya...@gmail.com>) escribió: > > > > > > > > Hi Enrique, > > > > > > > > > Dont use kie session start workflow. Kie-api should be used > instead. > > > > > > > > My example is a plain java in-memory ruleflow use case (not a > > persistent > > > > process nor a kogito service). ksession.startProcess() is the only > way > > I > > > > know to start a ruleflow. > > > > > > > > Could you let me know the right method which you mentioned as > "Kie-api > > > > should be used instead" ? > > > > > > > > Toshiya > > > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 2:52 PM Enrique Gonzalez Martinez < > > > > elguard...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Dont use kie session start workflow. Kie-api should be used > instead. > > > > > > > > > > El mar, 21 ene 2025, 3:54, Toshiya Kobayashi < > > > toshiyakobaya...@gmail.com> > > > > > escribió: > > > > > > > > > > > > but my concern is that it feels that we are back > > > > > > > almost 20 years ago, just before we introduce RulesFlow. > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes, it's true. This is the most basic solution and the only > > > supported > > > > > > solution as of 10.0.0 + kjar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > would it be possible to point an > > > > > > > example (or unit test) how to start a workflow using plain java > > > api? > > > > > > > > > > > > kSession.startProcess(processId) starts a bpmn process. It's > > > supported in > > > > > > 7.74.0.Final. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/tkobayas/kiegroup-examples/blob/master/Ex-ruleflow-migration/Ex-ruleflow-bpmn-7.74/src/main/java/com/sample/DroolsTest.java#L21 > > > > > > > > > > > > It also works in 10.0.0, but it depends on a legacy runtime which > > > will be > > > > > > removed as Enrique mentioned. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/tkobayas/kiegroup-examples/blob/master/Ex-ruleflow-10.0.0/src/main/java/com/sample/DroolsTest.java#L17 > > > > > > > > > > > > However, I guess Alex is asking for something different... Please > > > let me > > > > > > know the requirements in detail. > > > > > > > > > > > > Toshiya > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Jan 20, 2025 at 11:06 PM Alex Porcelli <a...@porcelli.me > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Another somewhat related question: would it be possible to > point > > an > > > > > > > example (or unit test) how to start a workflow using plain java > > > api? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Jan 20, 2025 at 8:53 AM Enrique Gonzalez Martinez > > > > > > > <elguard...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Given the current native implementation, it is not possible. > > > > > > > > You would need to rework the rule node in workflow probably. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > El lun, 20 ene 2025, 14:50, Alex Porcelli <a...@porcelli.me> > > > > > escribió: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Enrique, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My question still.. How is it possible to load a bunch of > > data > > > into > > > > > > > > > Drools and orchestrate multiple groups of rules without > > having > > > to > > > > > > > > > iterate over and over again on those loads of data. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jan 16, 2025 at 11:49 AM Enrique Gonzalez Martinez > > > > > > > > > <elguard...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Alex, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The only reason working memory exists in BPMN is to be > used > > > in > > > > > > > > > > conditional nodes which does not make much sense IMO. > (the > > > > > > > replacement > > > > > > > > > > for java conditional was already on the way) > > > > > > > > > > This was dropped at some point in kogito (don't know the > > > reasons > > > > > > why) > > > > > > > > > > but makes sense as working memory access does not make > > sense > > > from > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > workflow engine. > > > > > > > > > > How to orchestrate something like you are referring is > more > > > rule > > > > > > > engine > > > > > > > > > side. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > El jue, 16 ene 2025 a las 17:05, Tibor Zimányi (< > > > > > > tzima...@apache.org > > > > > > > >) > > > > > > > > > escribió: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Alex, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think the orchestration could be done with rule units > > > instead > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > using a > > > > > > > > > > > BPMN process to orchestrate the rule execution. However > > > maybe I > > > > > > am > > > > > > > > > missing > > > > > > > > > > > some context about rule units and I am wrong. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > > > > > > > > Tibor > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dňa št 16. 1. 2025, 15:40 Alex Porcelli < > > > porce...@apache.org> > > > > > > > > > napísal(a): > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thank you Toshiya for the reference. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Let me step back ignoring kjar and etc... and ask: > > could > > > you > > > > > > > share > > > > > > > > > how > > > > > > > > > > > > users can accomplish the same with the current state > of > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > technology? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Use case description: > > > > > > > > > > > > As a user, I need - using java api - add thousands > of > > > > > objects > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > > working memory and orchestrate 4 or 5 different > > ruleflow > > > > > groups > > > > > > > and, > > > > > > > > > > > > at the end of the execution, access the working > memory > > > and > > > > > > > iterate > > > > > > > > > > > > over the working memory content. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - > > > > > > > > > > > > Alex > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Jan 15, 2025 at 4:32 AM Toshiya Kobayashi > > > > > > > > > > > > <toshiyakobaya...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ah, thanks, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This one: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://lists.apache.org/thread/t3o842mbj03c57cg5yw3tmo25qf2br1t > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Jan 15, 2025 at 6:15 PM Enrique Gonzalez > > > Martinez < > > > > > > > > > > > > > elguard...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi toshiya > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Search in *this* list drop legacy runtime in > > > workflow. It > > > > > > is > > > > > > > a > > > > > > > > > > > > proposal. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > El mié, 15 ene 2025, 9:47, Toshiya Kobayashi < > > > > > > > > > > > > toshiyakobaya...@gmail.com> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > escribió: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, guys. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I searched > > > > > > https://groups.google.com/g/kogito-development > > > > > > > , > > > > > > > > > but I > > > > > > > > > > > > cannot > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > find the discussion about kjar. Anyway, Kogito > > > hasn't > > > > > > > > > supported kjar > > > > > > > > > > > > from > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the beginning, so it's a very old story. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Having said that, options seem to be: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > A) Create a small subset of bpmn parser and > > engine > > > > > (apart > > > > > > > from > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > kogito > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > bpmn code base), which aims at only ruleflow > > > (Start, > > > > > End, > > > > > > > Rule, > > > > > > > > > > > > Gateway). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > pros: Users can use the existing bpmn editor > to > > > > > author > > > > > > > > > ruleflow > > > > > > > > > > > > bpmn > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > files. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No need for a migration tool. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > cons: It will likely have some duplication > with > > > the > > > > > > > kogito > > > > > > > > > bpmn > > > > > > > > > > > > code > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > base. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > B) Create a new feature to support ruleflow. > e.g. > > > only > > > > > > > changing > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ruleflow-group with/without conditions. It may > or > > > may > > > > > not > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > like .rf > > > > > > > > > > > > > > file > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > * Note: This option's pros and cons are > > > ambiguous as > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > details > > > > > > > > > > > > are > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > yet defined > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > pros: The implementation may be smaller than > > bpmn > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > cons: Developing a migration tool would > require > > > some > > > > > > > effort. > > > > > > > > > (or no > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > migration tool) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Developing an authoring UI tool would > > > require > > > > > > some > > > > > > > > > effort. > > > > > > > > > > > > (or no > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > authoring tool) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > C) Just guide how to migrate ruleflow to drl > and > > > java > > > > > > code. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > pros: No additional development > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > cons: Probably it's not possible to create a > > > > > migration > > > > > > > tool. > > > > > > > > > It may > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > require a large effort if a user has lots of > > > ruleflows > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Any thoughts? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Toshiya > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Jan 13, 2025 at 6:13 PM Enrique > Gonzalez > > > > > > Martinez < > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > elguard...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jason, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > At the moment we dropped support for legacy > > > runtime > > > > > > kjar > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > not a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > supported > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > scenario in workflow. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > El vie, 10 ene 2025, 17:24, Jason Porter > > > > > > > > > <jpor...@ibm.com.invalid> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > escribió: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think however this ends up being decided > by > > > this > > > > > > > list, we > > > > > > > > > > > > should > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > post a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > conclusion/example/summary/something to the > > > > > > > > > us...@kie.apache.org > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <mailto: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > us...@kie.apache.org> list so anyone > search > > > that > > > > > > list > > > > > > > can > > > > > > > > > see > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > results. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Somewhat related to that, do we want to try > > to > > > > > > migrate > > > > > > > > > people > > > > > > > > > > > > from > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Google Groups list to the users list now > that > > > > > 10.0.0 > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > released? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jason Porter > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Software Engineer > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > He/Him/His > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > IBM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From: Alex Porcelli <porce...@apache.org> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Date: Friday, January 10, 2025 at 01:41 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To: dev@kie.apache.org <dev@kie.apache.org > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [DISCUSSION] > ruleflow > > > kjar > > > > > > use > > > > > > > case > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thank you, Toshiya, for bringing this up to > > ML. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > For context, I’d like to remember that > there > > > are no > > > > > > > Drools > > > > > > > > > or > > > > > > > > > > > > jBPM; > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > both > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > are components of Apache KIE. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As of today, Apache KIE 10 supports kjar; > > > Toshiya's > > > > > > > example > > > > > > > > > > > > proves > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Therefore, this could be considered a bug, > > not > > > a > > > > > new > > > > > > > use > > > > > > > > > case. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Enrique, regarding parity between runtimes, > > > it’s > > > > > not > > > > > > > > > necessary to > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > provide > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the same level of feature support for all > of > > > them, > > > > > so > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > scope > > > > > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > rule > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > flow could be narrowed. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What I believe we can’t do is be > > dysfunctional > > > and > > > > > > > force > > > > > > > > > drops of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > major > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > features after a major release without a > > proper > > > > > > > heads-up > > > > > > > > > or an > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > alternative > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > path. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Alex > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Jan 10, 2025 at 12:10 AM Enrique > > > Gonzalez > > > > > > > Martinez > > > > > > > > > < > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > egonza...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi toshiya > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Kjar is not supported in workflow as the > > main > > > > > focus > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > codegen. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Supporting in memory compilation would > lead > > > us to > > > > > > > > > support two > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > different > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > runtimes and integration with drools. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > At this point it might be working because > > the > > > > > > legacy > > > > > > > > > runtime is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > still > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > there > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > but any attempt to support this in kogito > > > will > > > > > get > > > > > > > > > pushed back > > > > > > > > > > > > as > > > > > > > > > > > > > > we > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > are > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > removing thr old runtime therefore kjar > > wont > > > > > work. > > > > > > > There > > > > > > > > > are > > > > > > > > > > > > > > several > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > reasons for it. From how big the effort > > > would be > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > parity > > > > > > > > > > > > features > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > both > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > runtimes. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So the answer is no. We should not. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > El vie, 10 ene 2025, 4:20, Toshiya > > Kobayashi > > > < > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > toshiyakobaya...@gmail.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > escribió: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hello, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Since Drools 8, in other words, since > > jBPM > > > was > > > > > > > moved > > > > > > > > > into > > > > > > > > > > > > Kogito, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ruleflow (drl + bpmn) kjar use case has > > > been > > > > > > > dropped, > > > > > > > > > because > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Kogito > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > doesn't support kjar. A user is facing > a > > > > > > migration > > > > > > > > > problem ( > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://kie.zulipchat.com/#narrow/channel/232677-drools/topic/Errors.20when.20moving.20from.20last.20Drools.207.20release.20to.20drools.208 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The combinations may sound confusing. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - drl + bpmn in kogito service is > > > supported. > > > > > (See > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > process-quarkus-example > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in incubator-kie-kogito-examples) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - drl in kjar is supported (See > > > > > kie-maven-plugin > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > incubator-kie-drools) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - drl + bpmn in kjar is the topic of > this > > > > > thread > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I created an example with KIE 10.0.0 + > > drl > > > + > > > > > > bpmn + > > > > > > > > > kjar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/tkobayas/kiegroup-examples/tree/master/Ex-ruleflow-10.0.0 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (Adding org.kie.kogito:jbpm-bpmn2 > > > dependency) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ``` > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > mvn clean install -DskipTests > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > mvn test > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ``` > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It seems to work fine so far. (It has > an > > > issue > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > > "import" > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > handling, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > but > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I worked around it using FQCN. It's > > another > > > > > > > story...) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Having said that, shall we revitalize > the > > > > > > ruleflow > > > > > > > > > kjar use > > > > > > > > > > > > case? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think of these points: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1. Confirm the supported scope : No > > > > > persistence. > > > > > > > > > Limited > > > > > > > > > > > > nodes > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (Start, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > End, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Rule, Gateway?) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2. Consult jbpm developers because the > > new > > > jbpm > > > > > > has > > > > > > > > > been > > > > > > > > > > > > targeted > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > kogito service use cases (= requires > > > quarkus or > > > > > > > > > springboot, > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > depends > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > on > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > codegen. Am I correct?). Any caveats to > > > support > > > > > > > kjar? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3. Create test cases in > kogito-runtimes? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Especially, about 2... Any concern > about > > > > > > supporting > > > > > > > > > kjar with > > > > > > > > > > > > > > jbpm > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (= > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > org.kie.kogito:jbpm-bpmn2)? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Toshiya > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: > dev-unsubscr...@kie.apache.org > > > > > > > > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: > > dev-h...@kie.apache.org > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > > Saludos, Enrique González Martínez :) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > > > > > 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 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Saludos, Enrique González Martínez :) > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@kie.apache.org > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@kie.apache.org > > > > > > > > >
