camel-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Christian Müller <>
Subject [DISCUSS CAMEL 3.0] weekly IRC chat at 02/12/2013 7:00PM - 8:00PM CET
Date Tue, 12 Feb 2013 20:58:16 GMT
This was the today's discussion on IRC (irc:// Feel
free to join the next time and/or comment on the today's discussed items.
The next one is scheduled for 02/19/2013 7:00PM - 8:00PM CET. Feel free to
join and express your ideas/needs/whishes/...

02/12/2013 7:00PM - 8:00PM CET - DISCUSSING THE CAMEL 3.0 ROAD MAP

[19:01:58] <cmueller>     so, lt's talk about our Camel 3.0 ideas and the
road map in the next hour...
[19:02:20]      elakito ( joined
the channel.
[19:03:31] hadrian     is around
[19:04:09] <cmueller>     I sent out a few mails to our committers (and I
have to send out some more)
[19:04:41] <cmueller>     and kindly ask to join our discussion - online or
[19:05:18] <cmueller>     and may be the champion for one or more of our
[19:05:50] <cmueller>     I hope we will see a more active discussion in
the comming days
[19:06:05] <hadrian>     next week i won't be around
[19:06:22] <hadrian>     the week after, see you at acna2013
[19:07:22] <cmueller>     yeah
[19:07:55]      scranton (~scranton@ left IRC. ("")
[19:08:10] <cmueller>     I hope we find time to discuss Camel 3.0 in
Portland too
[19:08:32] <hadrian>     there'll be plenty of time in the evening... and
[19:08:32] <cmueller>     maybe with some other users/contributors
[19:08:40] <hadrian>     who do we know is going?
[19:08:43] <hadrian>     absolutely
[19:10:05] <cmueller>     I think we have to look for a good place and
announce it on the dev/users list
[19:10:19] <hadrian>     yeah, that'd work
[19:10:22] <cmueller>     I'm available every evening ;-)
[19:11:00]      rajdavies (~ left IRC.
("Textual IRC Client:")
[19:11:49] <cmueller>     When do you plan to arrive?
[19:12:09] <hadrian>     i think i'll get there Mon afternoon, need to check
[19:12:25] <cmueller>     me too
[19:13:33] <cmueller>     25 February 4:00 PM
[19:14:28] <hadrian>     i don't have a lot of time today
[19:14:37] <hadrian>     anything in particular anybody wants to discuss?
[19:15:14] <hadrian>     ok, i'll throw one out there, i think we touched
on that before
[19:15:26] <cmueller>     Not from my site. I will use the time to transfer
some of my ideas to the road map
[19:15:39] <hadrian>     i did a lot of reading/research lately
[19:15:45]      rnewcomb ( left IRC. ("This
computer has gone to sleep")
[19:15:47]      iocanel ( left IRC.
("Computer has gone to sleep.")
[19:15:52] <hadrian>     and there is an area underused with camel
[19:15:59] <hadrian>     that has to do with api
[19:16:30] <hadrian>     there are a bunch of coops/consortia that define
their own apis/sets of wsdls
[19:16:48] <hadrian>     we do support that in camel, we have things like
gae, hl7
[19:16:53] <hadrian>     both apis and dataformats
[19:17:32] <hadrian>     but i don't think we make it clear enough how one
could have components targeted at integrating messages
[19:17:48] <cmueller>     don't forget paypal
[19:17:53] <hadrian>     specific to an industry into a larger app,
involving accounting, etc
[19:18:06] <hadrian>     things like saleforce, you name it
[19:18:18] <cmueller>     and other like saleforce
[19:18:23] <cmueller>     :-)
[19:18:38] <hadrian>     and related to that, i think security identity
must be part of the camel api
[19:18:51] <hadrian>     security and identity i mean
[19:18:55] <hadrian>     authn/authz
[19:19:32]      gnodet ( left
IRC. (gnodet)
[19:19:43] <hadrian>     running a route as, processing a message on behalf
[19:20:12]      gnodet (
joined the channel.
[19:20:21] <cmueller>     good point
[19:20:31] <hadrian>     should probably add a story about that in -ideas
[19:20:44] <hadrian>     then we need expressions, of course
[19:21:03] <hadrian>     to support idenentity/role based cbr/filters
[19:21:16] <cmueller>     true
[19:22:02] <hadrian>     but the cool thing is not much has to change, just
add the expressions
[19:22:20]      chm007 ( left
IRC. ("Computer has gone to sleep.")
[19:22:50] <cmueller>     and a few dsl extensions I guess
[19:23:13] <hadrian>     another thing i looked at recently is scxml, i'll
write a component for it too, probably at acon
[19:23:28] <hadrian>     i don't think we need dsl extensions
[19:23:37] <hadrian>     actually i start to dislike the dsl more and more
[19:24:11] <hadrian>     we have things like routingSlip and recipientList
in the dsl, fine, kinda clear eips
[19:24:30] <hadrian>     but what about setHeader? that'd be a transform as
an eip
[19:24:48] <hadrian>     so my 2 issues are that
[19:25:17] <hadrian>     1. we mix methods/eips from different layers of
abstractions, which makes things confusing
[19:25:37] <hadrian>     2. it grew constantly and became a little monster
[19:26:00] <hadrian>     but hey, that's my personal view
[19:26:29] <hadrian>     if we isolate it in a separate bundle it's less of
an issue
[19:26:38]      gnodet ( left
IRC. (gnodet)
[19:26:43] <cmueller>     I think your view is not totally wrong ;-)
[19:26:48] <hadrian>     maybe we can even layer dsl
[19:26:54] <hadrian>     kinda the way we do in bam
[19:27:28] <cmueller>     I have to check this
[19:27:40] <cmueller>     didn't looked into it for a long time
[19:29:41] <hadrian>     one question, any ideas of how to measure the 99%+
compatibility cibsen mentioned?
[19:29:53]      iocanel ( joined the
[19:30:13] <cmueller>     no idea
[19:30:22] <hadrian>     i recently went through a similar experience with
[19:30:29] <cmueller>     We can do a lot
[19:30:37] <hadrian>     so i refactored a lot in jacob without touching
the tests at all
[19:30:52] <cmueller>     but no idea how to measure it...
[19:30:58] <hadrian>     the fact that they still passed told me that the
refactoring worked and is compatible
[19:31:10] <hadrian>     or that the coverage was insufficient :)
[19:31:19] <hadrian>     but that wasn't my problem :)
[19:31:24] <cmueller>     hehe
[19:31:52] <cmueller>     But if we provide support
[19:31:56] <hadrian>     so after we refactor the camel tests to make them
more like unit tests and easier to manage
[19:32:09] <cmueller>     for upgreading to Camel 3.0 with some scripts
[19:32:19] <hadrian>     i was thinking to maybe keep them separately, or
not change them at all or something
[19:32:31] <cmueller>     they may change imports, some dsl expressions, ...
[19:32:44] <cmueller>     is this compatible or incompatible?
[19:32:53] <hadrian>     cmueller: my thinking was to have camel-rt-*.jars
[19:33:23] <hadrian>     and then a camel-core.jar for backwards
compatibility as an uber jar over rt *plus* extra apis/impl for
[19:33:42] <cmueller>     like cxf
[19:33:56] <hadrian>     pretty much, learn from the smart guys
[19:34:30] <cmueller>     why not...
[19:35:01] <cmueller>     the dsl could also go into its own bundle
[19:35:04] <hadrian>     since cibsen cares so much about the compatibility
we should volunteer him as the champion :)
[19:35:28] <hadrian>     yes and also in camel-core, so it won't impact
users until they migrate
[19:36:46] <hadrian>     that's all on my side and i gotta go shortly
[19:37:07] <cmueller>     There are some other committers I would like to
see as a champion
[19:37:41] <cmueller>     ok, do you plan to put these ideas on the idea
[19:37:51] <cmueller>     we should not forget it
[19:37:59] <hadrian>     i'll put the security one
[19:38:03] <cmueller>     security stuff, ...
[19:38:08] <cmueller>     ok, cool
[19:38:39] <hadrian>     measuring the compatibility is a trickier thing,
not sure how to get consensus on that one
[19:38:43] <cmueller>     I will add some comments on the "Split camel-core
into multiple parts" idea
[19:39:02] <hadrian>     everybody i think agrees in principle, but i am
not sure how we'll agree on how to go about it
[19:39:33] <hadrian>     yeah, that's there already, but the issue is how
do you ensure compatibility, what guarantees we make, etc
[19:39:44] <cmueller>     I think someone has to start hacking
[19:40:18] <cmueller>     and than more and more people get a concrete idea
about what he plan
[19:40:28] <cmueller>     t do
[19:41:02] <cmueller>     and the discussion will rise
[19:41:32] <hadrian>     the only thing to be done now, really is improving
the testing, imho
[19:42:22] hadrian     has 3 min left
[19:42:29] <cmueller>     I think we can do more
[19:42:43] <cmueller>     but let's discuss this the next time
[19:43:04] <cmueller>     after ApacheCon NA I also have more time for this
[19:43:07] <cmueller>     :-)
[19:45:21] <cmueller>     ok, take care



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