The code that is currently pushed up to my fork uses the seda component for the control channel, and a @Consume annotated method in the component class. While this worked fine and served the purpose, I have not been satisfied that it is the best solution. So, like you suggested, I am using the "remaining" portion of the URI to determine if it is a control channel message. I think that it is a better solution.
On Thu, Dec 23, 2021 at 9:28 AM Claus Ibsen <claus.ib...@gmail.com> wrote: > What you can do is for your component to have a way to send "control" > messages to it that it understands, then users can do > > from xxx > to acme:control?action=foo&arg=bar > > > On Thu, Dec 23, 2021 at 3:19 PM Claus Ibsen <claus.ib...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Thu, Dec 23, 2021 at 2:21 PM Steve973 <steve...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > Hello. It appears that the control bus component can only be used for > two > > > commands (route and language), and for routes, you can only specify an > > > action (start, stop, etc). What if we have a component that could also > > > benefit from management messages? Would it make sense to have a third > > > command of "component", and allow arbitrary URI params that the > component > > > understands? > > > > > > > No that is not the design of this component - it is for the normal use > > cases, to manage routes. > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Steve > > > > > > > > -- > > Claus Ibsen > > ----------------- > > http://davsclaus.com @davsclaus > > Camel in Action 2: https://www.manning.com/ibsen2 > > > > -- > Claus Ibsen > ----------------- > http://davsclaus.com @davsclaus > Camel in Action 2: https://www.manning.com/ibsen2 >
