camel-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Hadrian Zbarcea <>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Camel MUST use valid URIs for identifying and configuring Endpoints
Date Thu, 21 Jun 2012 17:19:00 GMT
Now finally something I could work with. More inline.


On 06/21/2012 12:41 PM, Hiram Chirino wrote:
> -1 This change would NOT be transparent to 2.x users.  Lets not hurt our
> 2.x Camel community!
I think it will will be transparent. It MUST. The intent is *precisely* 
to not hurt the 2.x Camel community. I said it before. Again, this is 
not about how exactly a solution will achieve this goal.

> This should have been a discussion about how we could
> improve Camel 3.x.
Isn't there a [discuss] thread that started on 06/11? No comments there 
until I started the [vote] thread (on 06/19, eight days later) for 
reasons I explained already. And it turns out that my suspicions were 
correct. I've seen this pattern before.

All -1s on this thread are either non technical (of the "I don't want 
any change" kind) or assume a solution (lots of "%x%x" hurt my artistic 
feelings). I am perfectly confident we can find a solution that both 
supports the current syntax and is aesthetically pleasing.

If anyone wonders if I am frustrated, yes I am. On the plus side, we now 
have an open discussion and we can talk about a solution.

>  From my point of view, Camel is all about being flexible and an integrating
> as many technologies as possible and avoid exclusive of approaches.  I
> think that needs to continue even in how you configure endpoints.  You
> might be able to convince me that most camel components SHOULD validate
> their endpoint config uri using the Java URI class.  Or that components
> should have a more formal way of expressing what endpoint config syntax it
> expects.
Agree. Perfect. The last part, I am not sure is necessary, but certainly 
an option.

> java.lang.String is the most flexible and OPEN configuration java class we
> have.  Lets keep it that way.
Agree. What I meant was String that conform to the URI spec. The api 
should stay the way it is. Sorry for not being clear enough.

> On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 8:37 PM, Hadrian Zbarcea<>  wrote:
>> Using URIs to identify and configure Endpoints is a notable Apache Camel
>> innovation. This feature was present in Camel from its first release. The
>> definition of the URIs syntax in unambiguous and defined in RFC-2396 [1].
>> Some components introduced along the way do not use valid URIs and this
>> needs to be corrected. This vote is intended to formalize the apparent lazy
>> consensus in the [discuss] thread [2] on the dev@ list. This vote
>> reflects agreement with the principle only. If this vote passes the details
>> of the solution will be fleshed out later.
>> [ ] +1 Camel MUST use valid URIs for Endpoint configuration
>> [ ] -1 Camel does not need to use valid URIs (please provide reason).
>> Vote is open for at least 72 hours.
>> --
>> Hadrian Zbarcea
>> Principal Software Architect
>> Talend, Inc
>> [1]**rfc2396.txt<>
>> [2] http://mail-archives.apache.**org/mod_mbox/camel-dev/201206.**
>> mbox/%3C4FD60168.5090009%**<>

View raw message