Ok, I've created an issue with a failing test attached: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CAMEL-6065
Best regards, Harald 2013/2/11 Claus Ibsen <claus.ib...@gmail.com>: > On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 10:38 AM, Harald Wellmann > <hwellmann...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Yes, I read the Javadoc. I have a test case which deterministically breaks >> when replacing 2) by 1). >> >> Given that SJMS is not yet released, should I create a JIRA issue, or post >> the details somewhere else? >> > > Yeah if you can create an unit test for the camel-sjms that shows the > issue, then that would be good. > Then we can add that test as part of a fix. > > Feel free to log a JIRA and attach the unit test / patch > http://camel.apache.org/support > > >> Best regards, >> Harald >> >> >> Am 10.02.2013 06:51, schrieb Claus Ibsen: >> >>> On Sat, Feb 9, 2013 at 4:05 PM, Harald Wellmann <hwellmann...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> I'm rather confused by the different flavours of InOut. >>>> >>>> What's the difference between >>>> >>>> 1) from("direct:calculatorProxy") >>>> .inOut("sjms:calculator-queue"); >>>> >>>> and >>>> >>>> 2) from("direct:calculatorProxy") >>>> .to("sjms:calculator-queue?exchangePattern=InOut"); >>>> >>>> inOut() in 1) does not seem to make any difference from to() at all. >>>> >>> >>> Its the same. >>> >>> There is a couple of ways of doing this. See the request-reply eip >>> pattern. >>> http://camel.apache.org/request-reply.html >>> >>> And when using Java code, you can also read the javadoc of the methods >>> as well as they may also contains some information. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> Best regards, >>>> Harald >>>> >>> >>> >>> >> > > > > -- > Claus Ibsen > ----------------- > Red Hat, Inc. > FuseSource is now part of Red Hat > Email: cib...@redhat.com > Web: http://fusesource.com > Twitter: davsclaus > Blog: http://davsclaus.com > Author of Camel in Action: http://www.manning.com/ibsen
