camel-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jon Anstey <jans...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Camel MUST use valid URIs for identifying and configuring Endpoints
Date Thu, 21 Jun 2012 10:44:33 GMT
On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 3:53 AM, Claus Ibsen <claus.ibsen@gmail.com> wrote:

> -1
>
>
>
> a)
> I am happy with the current model, and DO NOT want any changes /
> implications
> upon the Camel 2.x codebase. Its important for me that the current 2.x
> codebase is kept stable as is.
> Camel 2.10 is on the doorsteps, and Camel 2.x is now 3 years old. I
> want to give reasurance to the community
> that the 2.x is being kept as is (stability over changes).
>
> Camel 3.0 is IMHO the place where changes can be discussed and
> considered. Not the 2.x codebase.
>
>
> b)
> I have not yet seen any *real* end users call out on this and having
> issues etc.
> In fact the current model is very successful, and people build many
> Camel custom components
> without any troubles. And likewise using these components with the
> current model is
> easy for people to understand and do. People dont complain about the
> style/syntax of the endpoint uris.
> They are readable, easy to configure etc. And people just type what
> they want, without considering
> if its a spec valid URI, or that they need to % decimal escape certain
> chars etc.
>
> See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Percent-encoding
>
> c)
> Reading the reasons that Guillaume Nodet posted makes me even more
> convinced to keep the current model.
>
> d)
> I want components to be as compatible with as many Camel versions as
> possible.
> And this change causes incompatibility.
>
> e)
> Others dont mind either; In fact if you type this URL in your webbrowser
> http://www.google.dk/?q={{bla}}
>
> or I type the URL valid with the other curly brackets decimal encoded
> http://www.google.dk/?q=%7B%7Bbar%7D%7D
>
> Then Google dont mind either, it gives me the same page, and result
>
>
> Lets use on of the Camel examples then (from this page:
> http://camel.apache.org/file2), by typing in our web-browser
> http://www.google.dk/?q=file:bar?doneFileName=${file:name}.done
>
> And then press ENTER. Google search result is shown, and the address
> bar URL is changed to:
>
>
> http://www.google.dk/?q=file:bar?doneFileName=${file:name}.done#hl=da&output=search&sclient=psy-ab&q=file%3Abar%3FdoneFileName%3D%24%7Bfile%3Aname%7D.done&oq=file:bar%3FdoneFileName%3D%24%7Bfile%3Aname%7D.done&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&gs_l=hp.12...0.0.0.9447.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0..0.0...0.0.CdzGN56g1qA&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf<http://www.google.dk/?q=file:bar?doneFileName=$%7Bfile:name%7D.done#hl=da&output=search&sclient=psy-ab&q=file%3Abar%3FdoneFileName%3D%24%7Bfile%3Aname%7D.done&oq=file:bar%3FdoneFileName%3D%24%7Bfile%3Aname%7D.done&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&gs_l=hp.12...0.0.0.9447.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0..0.0...0.0.CdzGN56g1qA&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf>
> .,cf.osb&fp=1deded84056d2bf9&biw=1593&bih=951
>
>
> If you look then the escaped URL returned from the .
> file:bar%3FdoneFileName%3D%24%7Bfile%3Aname%7D.done
>

Is this really the URI format we'll be changing to?? If so, I have to say

-1

I mean, this kind of syntax change can be hidden via external tools like
IDEs so it is fine from that respect... but from a pure Camel perspective I
don't think anyone will be able to write any Camel URI without memorizing
all those escape characters... which is a pretty painful thing. Ease of use
is one of the things that has made Camel as popular as it is today IMHO.


>
> And that is really ugly. People should not need to type that.
>
>
> And a good read about URL encoding is wikipedia
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Percent-encoding
>
> Quote from Wikipedia: Other characters in a URI must be percent encoded.
> Reading that page (from wikipedia), says that other characters *must*
> be encoded, and hence forcing people to use the ugly %NN style is
> seriously reducing the ease of use with Camel.
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 2:37 AM, Hadrian Zbarcea <hzbarcea@gmail.com>
> 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
> > http://coders.talend.com/
> > http://camelbot.blogspot.com/
> >
> > [1] http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2396.txt
> > [2]
> >
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/camel-dev/201206.mbox/%3C4FD60168.5090009%40gmail.com%3E
>
>
>
> --
> Claus Ibsen
> -----------------
> FuseSource
> Email: cibsen@fusesource.com
> Web: http://fusesource.com
> Twitter: davsclaus, fusenews
> Blog: http://davsclaus.com
> Author of Camel in Action: http://www.manning.com/ibsen
>



-- 
Cheers,
Jon
---------------
FuseSource
Email: jon@fusesource.com
Web: fusesource.com
Twitter: jon_anstey
Blog: http://janstey.blogspot.com
Author of Camel in Action: http://manning.com/ibsen

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message