Christian, I agree, but it's already done. Camel has that already, it's
a method called preProcessUri.
However, while I fully agree that encoding is ugly I will remind
everybody that one of Camel's goals is to make integration simple!
Forcing users to encode uris is definitely not helping. My point was
that if component designers would be more careful with their design of
URIs, we would not be in this mess. So my proposal was provide an
alternative URI configuration for those components that today use
invalid URIs. Encoding is not the only solution!
My proposal was also to remove the current (old) URIs in Camel 3.0,
Hiram's counter proposal was to leave it as is and support both. I am
not against that, so it looks like we have a path forward, we only need
a more concrete proposal.
If other tools were to inter-operate with Camel (and that is more and
more the case in my experience) we *must* enforce the standards. We can
be lenient with the input we accept, but we must be strict in what we
produce. To me the test is simple, if new java.net.URI(str) throws an
exception, we've got work to do.
Hadrian
On 06/28/2012 06:24 PM, Christian Müller wrote:
If instead of
<from
uri="file://inbox?move=backup/${date:now:yyyyMMdd}/${file:name}&idempotentRepository=#myStore"
/>
or
from("file://inbox?move=backup/${date:now:yyyyMMdd}/${file:name}&idempotentRepository=#myStore")
I'm forced to write
<from
uri="file://inbox?move=backup%2F$%7Bdate%3Anow%3AyyyyMMdd%7D%2F%24%7Bfile%3Aname%7D&idempotentRepository=%23myStore"
/>
or
from("file://inbox?move=backup%2F$%7Bdate%3Anow%3AyyyyMMdd%7D%2F%24%7Bfile%3Aname%7D&idempotentRepository=%23myStore")
this isn't a good user experience and a way I would like going down.
By thinking about a solution, I got some ideas:
<from uri="xxx" /> for valid URIs
<from endpoint="" /> for quasi URIs (change "endpoint" for whatever we
agreed)
and in Java, we could have:
fromUri() for valid URIs (I didn't really it, because we have to do the
same with to, inOut, inOnly, ...)
from("") for quasi URIs
But at the end, we still have to deal with not valid RFC-2396 URIs (like
Google it does). By writing this, I think we have to have some kind of
URI/endpoint string preprocessing which make sure the component/endpoint
receives a valid URI (and do not encode encoded URIs twice). And by writing
this, I'm sure it's possible to handle this without introducing new DSL
elements or options. It may need some changes in the DefaultComponent (not
sure), but it should not be a big deal for Camel 3.0.0 where we can break
the API. Than we have one central place which is responsible for encoding
the given endpoint string and forward a valid URI for further processing.
WDYT?
Best,
Christian
On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 8:09 PM, Rob Davies <rajdav...@gmail.com> wrote:
This sounds reasonable to me
On 21 Jun 2012, at 18:36, Hadrian Zbarcea wrote:
Sounds perfect. That's exactly what I had in mind. You are proposing the
extra setting, which I am perfectly fine with.
Thanks a bunch,
Hadrian
On 06/21/2012 01:00 PM, Hiram Chirino wrote:
How about we add setting to the camel context which controls if the
'UnsafeUriCharactersEncoder.encode' method is used or not?
That way folks that feel that their camel configurations MUST always use
valid URI syntax can enable it. And the rest can continue to use the
current behavior.
Users are then in control.
On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 8:53 AM, Hadrian Zbarcea<hzbar...@gmail.com>
wrote:
In theory yes, that's how it kinda worked for many years. In practice
it
fails for all sorts of edge cases. The code that actually could be very
simple and clear is riddled with all sorts hacks. Look at the code.
Hadrian
On 06/21/2012 07:46 AM, Henryk Konsek wrote:
It seems that you want to force incompatibly between Camel 2.x and 3.0
which is a NOT "a no brainer" for me.
Good point. We will end up with ugly and backward incompatible URIs.
What about introducing "implicit URI encoding" term? Can't we just
assume that semi-URIs strings passed to the Camel DSLs are in fact
decoded URIs?
In such case:
import org.springframework.web.util.**UriUtils;
// Decoded URI passed to the component.
String decodedUri =
"file://inbox?expression=**backup/${date:now:yyyyMMdd}/${**file:name}";
// If we encode this URI we will end up with valid URI:
// file://inbox?expression=**backup/$%7Bdate:now:yyyyMMdd%**
7D/$%7Bfile:name%7D
String encodedUri = UriUtils.encodeUri(decodedUri, "UTF-8");
Maybe we just could validate that URI passed to the component is valid
AFTER encoding it?
String decodedUriFromDsl = ...
String encodedUri = UriUtils.encodeUri(**decodedUriFromDsl, "UTF-8");
assertValidUri(encodedUri);
This will guarantee that Camel uses valid URIs but won't break
contract of many existing components.
