Hi Charles and team, After our discussion http://irclogs.dankulp.com/logs/irclogger_log/camel?date=2013-11-05,Tue and the original mail thread. http://camel.465427.n5.nabble.com/update-of-websocket-td5740578.html
I thought about how to merge or integrate the atmosphere based server-side websocket feature to the existing websocket component. I still think putting these two in one would make the component unnecesarrily complex and hard to maintain the code to not break the original expectation while adding a new model. The existing websocket component is tightly coupled with jetty and exposes all the jetty options. In contrast, the atmosphere based websocket component is currenly analogue to the servlet component. So you can direclty run it within a container or if you want to use it in a standalone environment, you can just start an embedded serlet container of your choice and register the camel servlet to it. In that way, you don't have to put all the configuration options for the web container in the component itself, thereby keeping the component itself clean. from them. I think adding automatically an embedded jetty starup code in the atmosphere based webservice won't offer much benefit as much as adding the same option to the servlet component wouldn't. But if people think otherwise, we could add this in the servlet componen then it could be aslo used by the atmosphere based websocket component. Currently, I used the notation wsservlet:///path for the server-side sockets and ws://host:port/path or (for ssl wss://host:port/path) for the client-side sockets. And each of them can be used in the consumer side or in the producer side to support data transfer in full-duplex mode. I would prefer to add the atmosphere based websocket component (i.e., adding wsservlet) as a separate component and either include the client side socket support (i.e, ws and wss) in the same component or in another component. Separating the server-side and client-side will lead to a smaller dependency requirement for each, which will be preferable when people tend to use only one or the other. But when people tend to use both at the same time, putting them together will be simpler as well as from the point of view in keeping the number of components down. Opinions, objections or suggestions? Comments appreciated. Thanks. regards, aki
