luigidemasi commented on PR #29806: URL: https://github.com/apache/camel/pull/29806#issuecomment-6850592595
> I think the usage of the micrometer dependency pose a question if this feature should be instead part of `camel-micrometer` component instead. Or even an extension that depends on the presence of both components. > > My concern is that we are introducing a design high coupling on components and lower the cohesion. The metrics should be a responsibility of the micrometer component (or any other component that we will use eventually for such a scope). @squakez yes, I think a separate integration module would be a better fit. Making Micrometer optional avoids pulling it into applications that don’t need it, but it still leaves Micrometer-specific code in camel-semantic. I’d lean toward `camel-semantic-micrometer`, following the pattern of `camel-resilience4j-micrometer`. Semantic would keep publishing its events, and the bridge would own their mapping to Micrometer meters. The exporter already uses those public events, so this should be a fairly contained move. wdyt? -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: [email protected]
