Hi Claus,
I first did not see the connection to camel-ftp. I now see that it is
necessary at the moment. I think there are simpler solutions though.
I will work out a proposal. Of coure this is not for camel 2.x. The
change would be too big.
Christian
Am 31.08.2011 21:34, schrieb Claus
Am 31.08.2011 21:34, schrieb Claus Ibsen:
On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 3:28 PM, Christian Schneider
ch...@die-schneider.net wrote:
Frankly by introducing WrappedFile in the root package, which is,
according to you, a temporary solution, is a bad idea. You now add
more confusion to the mix. Just
Currently the file component uses a special message GenericFile to send
files into camel routes.
This is bad as several other parts of camel need to deal with this type.
It is already a bit better now that I introduced WrappedFile as an
abstraction of GenericFile so other parts of camel do not
On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 3:28 PM, Christian Schneider
ch...@die-schneider.net wrote:
Currently the file component uses a special message GenericFile to send
files into camel routes.
This is bad as several other parts of camel need to deal with this type. It
is already a bit better now that I
Comments inline,
Hadrian
On 08/31/2011 03:34 PM, Claus Ibsen wrote:
So what are your thoughts about that?
Camel 2.x should be kept backwards compatible and API stable.
We have end users who build custom components on top of the Camel file
component and rely on the API being as is.
That is
