Also, having a `contrib/experimental` area can help reduce maintenance
costs. For example, it could include disclaimers such as:

- Experimental APIs may change in future releases.
- Experimental features may be removed in future releases.
- Experimental features must not block a release. For example, if an
issue is found in an experimental feature during the release process,
we may choose to disable that feature for the current release.

This is just a proposal. I’d be happy to hear your thoughts.

Toshiya

On Fri, Feb 27, 2026 at 11:20 AM Toshiya Kobayashi
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Thank you for moving this topic forward, Alex.
>
> I agree that criteria are required.
>
> > What do you think would be reasonable criteria to establish?
>
> Here is a quick draft. Opinions are welcome:
>
> (Creation)
> - A new feature module should default to contrib/experimental (not
> limited to new contributors).
> - If a developer wants to place the module elsewhere from the
> beginning, they should start a thread on the dev mailing list (dev
> ML). If there are no objections, it is accepted. If there are
> objections, a vote will be held (Simple Majority vote:
> https://www.apache.org/foundation/glossary.html#SimpleMajority).
>
> (Promotion)
> - If anyone wants to promote the module to a different location, they
> should start a thread on the dev ML. If there are no objections, it is
> accepted. If there are objections, a vote will be held (Simple
> Majority vote).
>
> * These criteria do not apply to the creation of modules that are not
> new features (e.g., refactoring modules).
>
> Regards,
> Toshiya
>
> On Fri, Feb 27, 2026 at 2:18 AM Alex Porcelli <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > Subhanshu,
> >
> > Thank you for the contribution, it's great idea. I'll take some time to
> > review soon.
> >
> > Now I'm sorry to hijack the thread….
> >
> > Toshiya-san,
> >
> > The idea to have contrib/experimental makes total sense, but it misses
> > criteria. Lots of features have been added by new contributors without such
> > experimental or contrib labels.
> >
> > I'm absolutely in favor of exploring this idea, but we need to define a
> > fair criteria for when a thing is flagged as contrib/experimental and
> > what's the criteria to promote it out of that status.
> >
> > Otherwise we risk creating inconsistency in how we treat contributions,
> > especially since we've accepted feature additions at the top level in the
> > recent past.
> >
> > What do you think would be reasonable criteria to establish?
> >
> > -
> > Alex
> >
> > On Wed, Feb 25, 2026 at 11:15 PM, Toshiya Kobayashi <
> > [email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Subhanshu,
> > >
> > > Thank you for the contribution!
> > >
> > > The module looks good and will add value to the use cases you mentioned.
> > >
> > > My concern is that `drools-opentelemetry` looks like a feature built on
> > > top of the Drools engine, so it may not be appropriate to place it at the
> > > top level of the `drools` repository. Maybe we could have an umbrella
> > > directory like `drools-contrib` or `drools-experimental`. Does anyone have
> > > thoughts?
> > >
> > > Toshiya
> > >
> > > On Wed, Feb 25, 2026 at 8:42 PM Francisco Javier Tirado Sarti
> > > <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > > Nice addition.
> > > Although not completely related, I think it is worth mentioning that there
> > > is already some OpenTelemetry usage in the kogito-runtimes repository. 
> > > Here
> > > <https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-runtimes/tree/main/
> > > quarkus/addons/opentelemetry> node
> > > listeners are used to trace the progress of the Workflow. I do not think
> > > it will conflict with what you are planning to do (If I understood
> > > correctly, you are adding OpenTelemetry only to the rule engine) Also,
> > > since Quarkus's POM handles OpenTelemetry dependencies, we are good on 
> > > that
> > > too.
> > >
> > > On Wed, Feb 25, 2026 at 12:37 AM Subhanshu Bansal < subhanshu.bansal5566@
> > > gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi Everyone,
> > >
> > > I have opened a PR to implement support for OpenTelemetry for Drools.
> > >
> > > PR: https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-drools/pull/6595
> > >
> > > This is a separate module and why I used Open Telemetry specifically is
> > > because it gives you production visibility into how your Drools rules are
> > > actually behaving in a running system. Here’s what that means concretely
> > > for this project:Distributed TracingWhen rules execute inside a
> > > microservice, the TracingAgendaEventListener creates spans that connect to
> > > your existing traces. If a REST request hits your service, triggers rule
> > > evaluation, and then calls a downstream service, you get one unified trace
> > > showing exactly which rules fired, how long each took, and what facts were
> > > involved. Without this, Drools is a black box inside your trace — you see
> > > the request enter and leave, but nothing about the decision logic in
> > > between.Metrics for Production MonitoringThe MetricsAgendaEventListener
> > > exposes counters and histograms that flow into whatever backend you 
> > > already
> > > use (Prometheus, Datadog, Grafana, etc.). This lets you:
> > >
> > > - Alert when a rule suddenly fires 10x more than usual (possible data
> > > issue or regression)
> > > - Dashboard rule firing latency to catch performance degradations before
> > > users notice
> > > - Compare rule firing patterns across deployments (did the new rule
> > > version change behavior?)
> > >
> > > Why OpenTelemetry specifically (vs. the existing Micrometer in
> > > drools-metric)The existing drools-metric module focuses on internal
> > > node-level constraint evaluation metrics via Micrometer. OpenTelemetry 
> > > adds
> > > a different dimension with metrics and tracing.
> > >
> > > The key differentiator is correlation. When a customer complaint comes in,
> > > an SRE can search traces by the request ID, see exactly which rules fired
> > > during that request, how long each took, and what facts were inserted — 
> > > all
> > > without adding any logging or redeploying. That’s the operational benefit
> > > that the existing drools-metric module doesn’t address.
> > >
> > > I am open to all the suggestions. Feel free to reach out.
> > >
> > > Thanks!
> > >
> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To
> > > unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional
> > > commands, e-mail: [email protected]
> > >

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to