Mailing-List: contact users-help@camel.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: users@camel.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of claus.ibsen@gmail.com
 designates 209.85.218.178 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
         :content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
        b=vk4372UFmon0J3UYuRKJQfo/osqYu0EvwmB6vzTQmpFJW1UUAPCGN6c4U1/0yexm1h
         HhxXoJeoiPXmUIn5z2nHSswlPDCwsEohOgR0h364hAHovlnWvCvqckDW4ZfKiTucih0/
         UKJX+eoseJEzTJQMlQKljFZ3RR83TpAAZVs8E=
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <237A9E01-0517-4F48-BB32-4E29B64CD01D@gmail.com>
References: <237A9E01-0517-4F48-BB32-4E29B64CD01D@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 4 Apr 2009 09:20:16 +0200
Message-ID: <5380c69c0904040020m5843e5bdo4234db4f0f0abfc5@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: thoughts on the method names for the requestBody and
	requestBodyAndHeader etc
From: Claus Ibsen <claus.ibsen@gmail.com>
To: users@camel.apache.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On Sat, Apr 4, 2009 at 8:38 AM, Ryan Gardner <ryebrye@gmail.com> wrote:
> The requestBody method makes sense (it requests a body) - but
> "requestBodyAndHeader" and "requestBodyAndHeaders" etc methods make less
> sense - because I'm only requesting one thing (the body).
>
> maybe "requestBodyWithHeader" makes more sense? for the "sendBodyAndHeader"
> methods, it makes sense because you are sending two things (the body and the
> header)
>
> although, perhaps I'm just going crazy?
No it makes sense. You only get the body as reply.

But to make it consistent the sendBodyAndHeader could also be named as
sendBodyWithHeader.

>
> Ryan
>


-- 
Claus Ibsen
Apache Camel Committer

Open Source Integration: http://fusesource.com
Blog: http://davsclaus.blogspot.com/
Twitter: http://twitter.com/davsclaus
Apache Camel Reference Card:
http://refcardz.dzone.com/refcardz/enterprise-integration