Harald, First, thanks again for your feedback. I will update the documentation with a warning clarifying the limitation.
If you could clarify your use case for me, is this a one to many configuration? One endpoint definition to many routes? Thanks again, Scott ES On Feb 13, 2013, at 12:59 AM, Harald Wellmann <hwellmann...@gmail.com> wrote: > Well, it should be clearly documented that inOut() does not have the > desired effect and that camel-sjms behaves differently than camel-jms > in this respect. > > I can live with the current approach, and I'm eager to see a release > of camel-sjms in 2.11 to get rid of the transitive Spring dependency > in my Java EE app which is not required except by camel-jms. > > But it would be useful to remove that restriction in the next release. > > We use bean invocations tunnelled through JMS a lot, and it should be > possible to have InOut methods and InOnly methods in the same service > interface, tunneled through the same queue. > > Best regards, > Harald
