On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 3:53 AM, Claus Ibsen <claus.ib...@gmail.com> wrote:
> -1 > > > > a) > I am happy with the current model, and DO NOT want any changes / > implications > upon the Camel 2.x codebase. Its important for me that the current 2.x > codebase is kept stable as is. > Camel 2.10 is on the doorsteps, and Camel 2.x is now 3 years old. I > want to give reasurance to the community > that the 2.x is being kept as is (stability over changes). > > Camel 3.0 is IMHO the place where changes can be discussed and > considered. Not the 2.x codebase. > > > b) > I have not yet seen any *real* end users call out on this and having > issues etc. > In fact the current model is very successful, and people build many > Camel custom components > without any troubles. And likewise using these components with the > current model is > easy for people to understand and do. People dont complain about the > style/syntax of the endpoint uris. > They are readable, easy to configure etc. And people just type what > they want, without considering > if its a spec valid URI, or that they need to % decimal escape certain > chars etc. > > See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Percent-encoding > > c) > Reading the reasons that Guillaume Nodet posted makes me even more > convinced to keep the current model. > > d) > I want components to be as compatible with as many Camel versions as > possible. > And this change causes incompatibility. > > e) > Others dont mind either; In fact if you type this URL in your webbrowser > http://www.google.dk/?q={{bla}} > > or I type the URL valid with the other curly brackets decimal encoded > http://www.google.dk/?q=%7B%7Bbar%7D%7D > > Then Google dont mind either, it gives me the same page, and result > > > Lets use on of the Camel examples then (from this page: > http://camel.apache.org/file2), by typing in our web-browser > http://www.google.dk/?q=file:bar?doneFileName=${file:name}.done > > And then press ENTER. Google search result is shown, and the address > bar URL is changed to: > > > http://www.google.dk/?q=file:bar?doneFileName=${file:name}.done#hl=da&output=search&sclient=psy-ab&q=file%3Abar%3FdoneFileName%3D%24%7Bfile%3Aname%7D.done&oq=file:bar%3FdoneFileName%3D%24%7Bfile%3Aname%7D.done&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&gs_l=hp.12...0.0.0.9447.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0..0.0...0.0.CdzGN56g1qA&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf<http://www.google.dk/?q=file:bar?doneFileName=$%7Bfile:name%7D.done#hl=da&output=search&sclient=psy-ab&q=file%3Abar%3FdoneFileName%3D%24%7Bfile%3Aname%7D.done&oq=file:bar%3FdoneFileName%3D%24%7Bfile%3Aname%7D.done&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&gs_l=hp.12...0.0.0.9447.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0..0.0...0.0.CdzGN56g1qA&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf> > .,cf.osb&fp=1deded84056d2bf9&biw=1593&bih=951 > > > If you look then the escaped URL returned from the . > file:bar%3FdoneFileName%3D%24%7Bfile%3Aname%7D.done > Is this really the URI format we'll be changing to?? If so, I have to say -1 I mean, this kind of syntax change can be hidden via external tools like IDEs so it is fine from that respect... but from a pure Camel perspective I don't think anyone will be able to write any Camel URI without memorizing all those escape characters... which is a pretty painful thing. Ease of use is one of the things that has made Camel as popular as it is today IMHO. > > And that is really ugly. People should not need to type that. > > > And a good read about URL encoding is wikipedia > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Percent-encoding > > Quote from Wikipedia: Other characters in a URI must be percent encoded. > Reading that page (from wikipedia), says that other characters *must* > be encoded, and hence forcing people to use the ugly %NN style is > seriously reducing the ease of use with Camel. > > > > > On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 2:37 AM, Hadrian Zbarcea <hzbar...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > Using URIs to identify and configure Endpoints is a notable Apache Camel > > innovation. This feature was present in Camel from its first release. The > > definition of the URIs syntax in unambiguous and defined in RFC-2396 [1]. > > > > Some components introduced along the way do not use valid URIs and this > > needs to be corrected. This vote is intended to formalize the apparent > lazy > > consensus in the [discuss] thread [2] on the dev@ list. This vote > reflects > > agreement with the principle only. If this vote passes the details of the > > solution will be fleshed out later. > > > > > > [ ] +1 Camel MUST use valid URIs for Endpoint configuration > > [ ] -1 Camel does not need to use valid URIs (please provide reason). > > > > Vote is open for at least 72 hours. > > > > > > -- > > Hadrian Zbarcea > > Principal Software Architect > > Talend, Inc > > http://coders.talend.com/ > > http://camelbot.blogspot.com/ > > > > [1] http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2396.txt > > [2] > > > http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/camel-dev/201206.mbox/%3C4FD60168.5090009%40gmail.com%3E > > > > -- > Claus Ibsen > ----------------- > FuseSource > Email: cib...@fusesource.com > Web: http://fusesource.com > Twitter: davsclaus, fusenews > Blog: http://davsclaus.com > Author of Camel in Action: http://www.manning.com/ibsen > -- Cheers, Jon --------------- FuseSource Email: j...@fusesource.com Web: fusesource.com Twitter: jon_anstey Blog: http://janstey.blogspot.com Author of Camel in Action: http://manning.com/ibsen
