Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-camel-users-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 67096 invoked from network); 3 Nov 2010 23:28:32 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by 140.211.11.9 with SMTP; 3 Nov 2010 23:28:32 -0000 Received: (qmail 63552 invoked by uid 500); 3 Nov 2010 23:29:03 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-camel-users-archive@camel.apache.org Received: (qmail 63518 invoked by uid 500); 3 Nov 2010 23:29:03 -0000 Mailing-List: contact users-help@camel.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: users@camel.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list users@camel.apache.org Received: (qmail 63510 invoked by uid 99); 3 Nov 2010 23:29:03 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 03 Nov 2010 23:29:03 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.2 required=10.0 tests=FREEMAIL_FROM,HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of christian.mueller@gmail.com designates 209.85.212.173 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.212.173] (HELO mail-px0-f173.google.com) (209.85.212.173) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 03 Nov 2010 23:28:57 +0000 Received: by pxi14 with SMTP id 14so64248pxi.32 for ; Wed, 03 Nov 2010 16:28:37 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:received:in-reply-to :references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=+/fFFSqqfoNj4NJDWNeqQpIOozs35TCXd61b5/hlkyE=; b=vtTlJict+zSkHZ+4U5VbgOonW/gSTdh6XibNVX8xKZO1WwiD4aWnp0+tl7hz18KqoO Q//QmZ8z/Efz2WPctd8L7OzP4AYBlHcrV0gF7SrtkJxlK7XE07GOqt5rD0BNKis01fR5 24kHz9ix6gIoNOsv5Df/NUq3/UE2JUB5Ge9vE= 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; b=eV8ZG9v1+/q7bGaebeaub0SLJiQ4jzHan8YzKgdFP96liMGP1XlS9YTWlo874B2sDt diDG7SQfXa4enpKF/xzsTa0iTQz4b1lLoWyKcaREZJ60aKUo2uh1v7Xvu4Ixm/FUVC1X ZvcUXZsqOPGO02T2Uwl4/Vq/gzYGT8CCzXJIU= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.142.192.17 with SMTP id p17mr7600102wff.386.1288826916272; Wed, 03 Nov 2010 16:28:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.142.86.20 with HTTP; Wed, 3 Nov 2010 16:28:36 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4CD175D6.9000205@softwaremind.pl> References: <4CD175D6.9000205@softwaremind.pl> Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2010 00:28:36 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Ambiguous method invocations in bean binding From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Christian_M=FCller?= To: users@camel.apache.org Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary=000e0cd28d2a85791904942e669b --000e0cd28d2a85791904942e669b Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=000e0cd28d2a85790d04942e6699 --000e0cd28d2a85790d04942e6699 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Hello Rafal! Please provide more details like the Camel version you are using in further questions. Please have a look here: http://camel.apache.org/how-can-i-get-help.html However, I assume you have a String as payload in your message. The default Camel type converter mechanism is able to convert this payload also into an InputStream. This is the reason, why this is ambiguous for Camel... I wondering, if we SHOULD make Camel a bit smarter here. I made a patch which fixes this issue. We check whether the message payload is an instance of the bean method argument. If so, we will use this method and don't convert the body. Any objections? Cheers, Christian --000e0cd28d2a85790d04942e6699 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hello Rafal!

Please provide more details like the Camel version you = are using in further questions. Please have a look here: http://camel.apache.org/how-can-i= -get-help.html

However, I assume you have a String as payload in your message. The def= ault Camel type converter mechanism is able to convert this payload also in= to an InputStream. This is the reason, why this is ambiguous for Camel...
I wondering, if we SHOULD make Camel a bit smarter here. I made a patch= which fixes this issue. We check whether the message payload is an instanc= e of the bean method argument. If so, we will use this method and don't= convert the body. Any objections?

Cheers,
Christian
--000e0cd28d2a85790d04942e6699-- --000e0cd28d2a85791904942e669b--