good to get a full response instead of "copy this / yes, you can do that / etc..".
actually, I am not sure what I am agreeing with you on :) And it is not about agreeing, it is about me getting Drools Flow approach, since the documentation is very high level. Where I would really throw forces to make it low-level, that would be documentation, but not a product APIs. That is a definite differences in opinions. Think about other good frameworks, like Spring and Hibernate for example. If I had to do 6 low level calls to get a reference to a bean in Spring, I would never even consider using it, would go for CDI http://jcp.org/en/jsr/detail?id=299 right away. (but no, it is as simple HIGH LEVEL as Autowire or implement a certain (Aware) interface) If I had to create 15 queries and write my high level APIs on top of the Hibernate's low level APIs to make them flexible enough, I would rather use iBatis, or just GORM (but no I can use a nice HIGH LEVEL Criteria API) The point is there should be a healthy balance between the framework and the client. Now, I am not saying Drools Flow does not have that balance, what I am saying help me learn Drools Flow in a way that I can use its full power. And I am SURE that there is a better way in Drools Flow to find all waiting workitems. Maybe not by a single HIGH LEVEL API call ( not YET :) ), but surely not through some low level NodeInstance hooks. And as far as Java World, Asgard http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asgard_%28Stargate%29 World, and many other worlds, clean and simple is always stronger, than weakly-typed, convoluted and low-level. /Anatoly -- View this message in context: http://n3.nabble.com/Resuming-the-Flow-SESSION-ID-PROCESS-INSTANCE-ID-WORKITEM-ID-tp607507p693769.html Sent from the Drools - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. _______________________________________________ rules-users mailing list rules-users@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
