Hi, Claus!
It's not a point to stop you doing that.
But I use .inputType() in every route in which I am able to guarantee
the protocol. I cannot guarantee input type from Kafka because it is
byte array, but every in-memory routes I do.
It is like interface for OOP - the contract. When I read my routes line
by line from above till bellow I read from(...).inputType(...) and it
helps to remember the contract of interoparations.
Is it really so interfere with development of Kamelets?
On 1/17/22 16:15, Claus Ibsen wrote:
Hi
We have some less known features in camel-core
https://camel.apache.org/manual/validator.html
https://camel.apache.org/manual/transformer.html
That can be used to associate route(s) with a data type contract, and
have the route automatically validate if the input/output is as
expected to this contract.
You can also associate routes with automatic transformation with data-formats.
However all of these are not really in use, and it has had limited
innovation since its addition.
They are part of the model but to set up the validator/transformers
then this is not fully implemented in all DSLs and make them harder to
use outside Java or the legacy XML for blueprint/spring.
Today the high level building blocks are Kamelets where you can/should
specify the data shape of the kamelet as input/output etc.
In light of this I think we should deprecate the data contract we have
today and focus on data contracts on Kamelets, and re-architect a more
modern cloud native perspective for this.
A search on the user mailing list, then, I could only find a post from
2017 from a CXF user that declared Camel route with an
inputType(MyClassHere.class) to setup a route data type.
--
Vyacheslav Boyko
mailto:[email protected]
