camel-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From James Strachan <ja...@fusesource.com>
Subject Re: What is the purpose of camel-core-xml? Move the code to camel-core?
Date Fri, 02 Sep 2011 10:41:29 GMT
On 1 September 2011 02:01, Hadrian Zbarcea <hzbarcea@gmail.com> wrote:
> Personally, I don't think we need a big jar. My understanding is that
> Christian is looking for ways to *improve* modularity and reduce
> dependencies.

But he was suggesting making camel-core bigger & adding in more
dependencies by shoving camel-core-xml in there :). For someone so
keen to try enforce rules, he's broke his modularity rule already :)


> I am not a big fan of big fat jars (and my understanding is
> that that is not what Christian proposed). Modularity is a key aspect of
> Camel.

Agreed. Though having a bigger jar as an option (say camel-core +
camel-core-xml + camel-spring) could be handy for folks who use camel
+ spring together alot. Its less of an issue in the osgi world with
features though.


> Anyway, I'd suggest leaving camel-core-xml the way it is and tackle that in
> 3.0.

Agreed. We should be careful to keep 2.x of Camel nice and stable from
an API perspective; but we can experiment in 3.x for sure.

I'm also not sure how much smaller we can really get camel-core; since
out of the box you'd assume camel can work with JMX, beans, files &
implement the patterns and have the model in there. Shaving off
20-100k doesn't seem that big a deal IMHO; the bean / file stuff isn't
that big.

-- 
James
-------
FuseSource
Email: james@fusesource.com
Web: http://fusesource.com
Twitter: jstrachan, fusenews
Blog: http://macstrac.blogspot.com/

Open Source Integration and Messaging

Mime
View raw message