ah.. gotcha.. but then you could not incrementally migrate projects. I.e. Ihave 500 old camel routes.. and I want to migrate 50 of them for the next version of my app..
On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 1:01 PM, Hadrian Zbarcea <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The idea is to move it to a different jar, not a different package, to > maintain backwards compatibility. > > Comments and ideas always welcome! > > Hadrian > > On Nov 21, 2008, at 12:55 PM, raulvk wrote: > >> Hi, I was just following this thread and even though I am not a >> committer I thought it would be OK if I put it my 2 cents... >> Don't you think that moving the old noun-based DSL to a different >> package than the current one would defeat the purpose of >> backward-compatibility? If this was done, I believe that all current >> code would still need to be changed to reference the newly package >> that contains the old DSL, therefore disarming the >> backward-compatibility of this solution... >> >> Am I right? >> >> 2008/11/21 Hadrian Zbarcea <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >>> >>> Interesting idea, but in that case, I'd rather put the old ones in a >>> separate package. Or put both dsls in separate jars (and use one or the >>> other). >>> >>> >>> On Nov 21, 2008, at 12:23 PM, Hiram Chirino wrote: >>> >>>> I'm not sure how backward compatible we want to remain. It could be >>>> possible to put the new java DSL route builders in a new package or >>>> class so that it is possible to one day provide a backward >>>> compatibility support. Not that we have to do that day 1 of the 2.0 >>>> release.. >>>> >>>> What do you think? >>>> >>>> >>>> On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 8:38 AM, Jon Anstey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Agreed. We shouldn't even be thinking of keeping two sets of DSL >>>>> methods >>>>> for >>>>> the 2.0 release, would be too messy. I'd say go for it! >>>>> >>>>> BTW we've been keeping track of API breaks in the 2.0.0 release notes >>>>> just >>>>> so users are aware of this >>>>> http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CAMEL/Camel+2.0.0+Release >>>>> >>>>> On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 4:26 AM, Willem Jiang >>>>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Hi >>>>>> >>>>>> In the CAMEL-64[1], we are talking about using the verbs for EIP >>>>>> actions. >>>>>> Current Camel's DSL and Spring configruation file are using noun to >>>>>> define the routing rules. >>>>>> >>>>>> Such as >>>>>> from(seda:a).throttler(10).to(mock:result); >>>>>> >>>>>> <camelContext id="camel" >>>>>> xmlns="http://activemq.apache.org/camel/schema/spring";> >>>>>> <route> >>>>>> <from uri="seda:a" /> >>>>>> <throttler maximumRequestsPerPeriod="3" timePeriodMillis="30000"> >>>>>> <to uri="mock:result" /> >>>>>> </throttler> >>>>>> </route> >>>>>> </camelContext> >>>>>> >>>>>> it will be better if we make DSL like this >>>>>> from(seda:a).throttle(10).to(mock:result); >>>>>> >>>>>> As we discussed in the JIRA, it is impossible to make the Spring >>>>>> schema >>>>>> support old nuns and new verbs at same time. >>>>>> >>>>>> Since we are working on Camel 2.0, it will be painless if we directly >>>>>> move on to use the verbs instead of still supporting nuns in DSL and >>>>>> Spring configuration. >>>>>> >>>>>> Any thoughts ? >>>>>> >>>>>> [1]https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/CAMEL-64 >>>>>> >>>>>> Willem >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Cheers, >>>>> Jon >>>>> >>>>> http://janstey.blogspot.com/ >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Regards, >>>> Hiram >>>> >>>> Blog: http://hiramchirino.com >>>> >>>> Open Source SOA >>>> http://open.iona.com >>> >>> > > -- Regards, Hiram Blog: http://hiramchirino.com Open Source SOA http://open.iona.com
