+1 I think it is a good idea to group them this way. Maybe we could include vertx ones to this as well?
On Thu, Mar 11, 2021 at 7:41 AM Peter Palaga <ppal...@redhat.com> wrote: > Thanks Claus, that's definitely a good idea on the source code level! > > We do something similar in the components reference > https://camel.apache.org/components/latest/index.html > I wonder whether it is the same grouping? > > And I wonder whether we could add the group info to camel-catalog? > > I would not mind following the same structure in Camel Quarkus. Getting > the info via Camel Catalog would simplify both the transition and the > maintenance. > > Thanks, > > -- Peter > > On 11/03/2021 07:05, Tadayoshi Sato wrote: > > Great idea. > > > > +1 > > > > On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 8:17 PM Andrea Cosentino <anco...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > >> Yeah, it makes sense. > >> > >> +1. > >> > >> We need to create some issues to track these down. > >> > >> Il giorno mer 10 mar 2021 alle ore 12:15 Claus Ibsen < > >> claus.ib...@gmail.com> > >> ha scritto: > >> > >>> Hi > >>> > >>> To make maintaining Camel components easier, and to avoid the > >>> components root folder gets too big, then recently we have moved cloud > >>> components into aws, google etc. > >>> > >>> I think we could do the same for more components like > >>> - debezium > >>> - microprofile (all microprpofile modules) > >>> - spring (all spring modules) > >>> - test (unit test and testcontainers) > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> -- > >>> Claus Ibsen > >>> ----------------- > >>> http://davsclaus.com @davsclaus > >>> Camel in Action 2: https://www.manning.com/ibsen2 > >>> > >> > > > > > > -- Otavio R. Piske http://orpiske.net
