Skip to content

Explore unifying DMN storage and execution path for custom and library checks #441

@prestoncabe

Description

@prestoncabe

We have complexity arising from the differences in how custom checks and library checks are created, edited, stored, and used in the web app.

Assumption/ideal to explore: All checks should exist under a single "library" paradigm. They should be implemented as similarly as possible and managed via web interface. The difference between "custom" and "library" should come down to permissions and sharing logic.

Advantages:

  • less complexity in the web app's code paths and in the "eligibility check" concept. (one paradigm instead of two)
  • one interface for creating/managing
  • opens up interesting features like sharing checks, duplicating/modifying library checks, promoting custom checks to the library, using existing library checks within a custom check, etc.

Probable challenges:

  • keeping the library usable as a standalone API
  • the difference between how custom and library checks are currently implemented (e.g. more boilerplate and DMN know-how are required for library checks)
  • significant UX challenges to ensure proper editing of checks with guardrails necessary (simplifying or otherwise improving the default DMN-editing experience)

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    big liftThis will require an unusually large amount of work, coordination, or deep understanding.refactorImprovements to architecture, code formatting, etc.

    Type

    No type
    No fields configured for issues without a type.

    Projects

    Status

    Backlog

    Relationships

    None yet

    Development

    No branches or pull requests

    Issue actions