camel-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Johan Edstrom <seij...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Contributing Scomp Component (was Contributing Stomp Component)
Date Thu, 07 Feb 2013 20:24:02 GMT
I have to say I kinda agree with this.
We could mark a component as possibly "less quickly patched", 
but nixing contributions on a component level seems kinda wrong to me...


On Feb 7, 2013, at 1:20 PM, Henryk Konsek <hekonsek@gmail.com> wrote:

>> Because Camel and Camel-Extra are Java based projects, I don't think we
>> should integrate this component (even if it's a cool component for Scala
>> guys).
> 
> I'm afraid I must disagree :) .
> 
> We support Scala as the 1st class citizen DSL language for Camel and I
> don't see any reason why we should exclude components using Scala
> libraries.
> 
> Also from the end-user point of view Scala is just an another library.
> I could create the following route in Java DSL and I would not be even
> aware that I'm using Scala under the hood. For example:
> from("jms:queue").to("someScalaComponent:foo")
> 
> The core of the Camel and the Java-related components are written in
> Java, but in my humble opinion there is no reason we shouldn't provide
> components written in Scala, as long as the subject of the component
> is also written in Scala.
> 
> Maybe we could settle some "official policy" regarding Scala-related
> code for Camel?
> 
> --
> Henryk Konsek
> http://henryk-konsek.blogspot.com


Mime
View raw message