Re: 3.0 Ideas

if you configure spring to use the JtaTransactionManager which inherits from PlatformTransactionManager, then you'll have the spring transaction layer using JTA. On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 1:22 AM, Chris Geer wrote: > On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 5:16 PM, Guillaume Nodet wrote: > > > Getting rid of s

Camel.trunk.notest - Build # 1804 - Fixed

The Apache Jenkins build system has built Camel.trunk.notest (build #1804) Status: Fixed Check console output at https://builds.apache.org/job/Camel.trunk.notest/1804/ to view the results.

Re: 3.0 Ideas

On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 1:22 AM, Chris Geer wrote: > On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 5:16 PM, Guillaume Nodet wrote: > >> Getting rid of spring transaction support and implementing our own layer in >> camel would be a big win, as it's really a big missing feature in >> blueprint. >> I'm willing to pay a

Re: 3.0 Ideas

On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 5:16 PM, Guillaume Nodet wrote: > Getting rid of spring transaction support and implementing our own layer in > camel would be a big win, as it's really a big missing feature in > blueprint. > I'm willing to pay a beer to anyone tackling that in 2.12 ... > > Btw, what's yo

Re: 3.0 Ideas

Getting rid of spring transaction support and implementing our own layer in camel would be a big win, as it's really a big missing feature in blueprint. I'm willing to pay a beer to anyone tackling that in 2.12 ... Btw, what's your need for getting rid of spring transaction ? Is that also to remov

Re: 3.0 Ideas

CAMEL-6108 On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 1:50 PM, Chris Geer wrote: > On Wednesday, February 27, 2013, Henryk Konsek wrote: > >> Hi Chris, >> >> > 1) Refactor the JMS Component to use JTA transactions instead of Spring >> > Transactions. >> >> I'm not

Re: 3.0 Ideas

On Wednesday, February 27, 2013, Henryk Konsek wrote: > Hi Chris, > > > 1) Refactor the JMS Component to use JTA transactions instead of Spring > > Transactions. > > I'm not really sure if we need to include such kind of changes in > Camel 3 roadmap. The idea is good, but can't we just raise Jira

Re: 3.0 Ideas

Hi Chris, > 1) Refactor the JMS Component to use JTA transactions instead of Spring > Transactions. I'm not really sure if we need to include such kind of changes in Camel 3 roadmap. The idea is good, but can't we just raise Jira issue for it? And implement, even in Camel 2? :) Best regards. --

3.0 Ideas

I'd like to cast my vote for a couple things we'd like to see in Camel 3.0 if it can be fit in. 1) Refactor the JMS Component to use JTA transactions instead of Spring Transactions. 2) We agree with the existing idea for "JMX Naming" on the idea page. Removing the hostname from the JMX names would

Re: [DISCUSS CAMEL 3.0] weekly IRC chat at 02/19/2013 7:00PM - 8:00PM CET

Refactoring or new api. Is that really the goal in itself ? What new features are needed that can't be done with the current code ? Anyway, there's no real point in discussing that really. if you want to experiment with a new api, just do it in a branch and we'll discuss that once there is somet

Re: [DISCUSS CAMEL 3.0] weekly IRC chat at 02/19/2013 7:00PM - 8:00PM CET

Hi Guillaume, I am not absolutely mandating a rewrite. The new API will simply allow us to do any change in core we want. That can be a rewrite but it does not have to be. I know that the aproach with a new API is more work than a simple refacturing. The big advantage is that we can stay comp

Re: [DISCUSS CAMEL 3.0] weekly IRC chat at 02/19/2013 7:00PM - 8:00PM CET

cschneider, what you basically suggest is to rewrite camel, and create a layer to bridge the old to the new camel. Before going this way, I'd like to understand why is that necessary (but the fact that it's cleaner, which in itself is nice, but not sufficient to me). I do agree that the model and