On Fri, Sep 24, 2010 at 3:22 PM, Hadrian Zbarcea <hzbar...@gmail.com> wrote: > Let's not get there (again). The community agreed already at least twice that > this api is a good abstraction of what we try to do. As any abstraction it > has to be properly documented. If it's not clear enough, that's where I would > focus. >
I can't recall we agreed this twice or more (since you say at least). There was a heated debate about the API. And yes I think we should leave it as it. On the other hand I am entitled to express my personal view on the API. And it may be interesting for people in the community to hear from a committer who was worked 30+ months on Camel, his though of the Exchange API. There has been many Camel users who got started with Camel that got confused / very confused about the API. So its definitely not good, despite its nature back from the JBI specification. Competing integration frameworks such as Mule and Spring Integration has a simpler Exchange API in this area. And the future of JBI is also dubios. So you may questions where if someone creates a new integration framework, whether he/she will go down the path of JBI and chose to have a getIn and getOut methods on his/her's "Exchange" type. > Hadrian > > On Sep 24, 2010, at 8:53 AM, Claus Ibsen wrote: > >> On Fri, Sep 24, 2010 at 2:51 PM, <patrice.god...@orange-ftgroup.com> wrote: >>>> "But the Camel routing engine will automatic handle using IN if there >>>> is no OUT message." >>> >>> So this is the magic behind! :-) >>> I don't remember reading this anywhere previously and I was wondering how >>> data was flowing from in to out messages. >>> >>>> >>>> Working on IN is just much easier to explain and use for end users. >>> >>> Honestly it was confusing to me. >>> Writing something to an "in" message to make it go "out" was really >>> confusing to me. >>> >> >> Yeah the API is not optimal there. We have debated this many times on >> the dev forums. >> >> I personally would remove the IN and OUT and only keen one message. >> getMessage() >> >> But the current API is kinda stuck due it been there since 1.0 and the >> old legacy from JBI and whatnot. >> >> >> >>> >>> >>> ********************************* >>> This message and any attachments (the "message") are confidential and >>> intended solely for the addressees. >>> Any unauthorised use or dissemination is prohibited. >>> Messages are susceptible to alteration. >>> France Telecom Group shall not be liable for the message if altered, >>> changed or falsified. >>> If you are not the intended addressee of this message, please cancel it >>> immediately and inform the sender. >>> ******************************** >>> >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Claus Ibsen >> Apache Camel Committer >> >> Author of Camel in Action: http://www.manning.com/ibsen/ >> Open Source Integration: http://fusesource.com >> Blog: http://davsclaus.blogspot.com/ >> Twitter: http://twitter.com/davsclaus > > -- Claus Ibsen Apache Camel Committer Author of Camel in Action: http://www.manning.com/ibsen/ Open Source Integration: http://fusesource.com Blog: http://davsclaus.blogspot.com/ Twitter: http://twitter.com/davsclaus
