I see what you mean James (I guess my early days in networky made it logical to me :-)
I think wireTap would not suit, but .. how about toAll() toEach() parallel() / inParallel() multiSend() megaCopy() ;-) On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 00:07, Martin Gilday <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Just throwing some more ideas: > > multipleReceivers() > replicate() / replicator() > > It is quite hard to come up with something that doesn't confuse it with > a 'splitter' > > > ----- Original message ----- > From: "James Strachan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [email protected] > Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2008 12:57:27 +0000 > Subject: Re: [jira] Created: (CAMEL-1183) rename multicast -> wireTap in > the Java DSL and XML config? > > The EIP book talks about 2 outputs for WireTap - but it could be N > really - it copies the same message to each output. > > I've always found the multicast name a bit sucky - as folks tend to > think about network multicast. > > Am not 100% sure about this - just wanted to float the idea to see > what folks thought > > 2008/12/11 Ramon Buckland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > This seems a little odd to me also. > > > > (unless I am missing something) .. > > > > EIP states a WireTap as > > > >> The *Wire Tap* is a fixed *Recipient List*< > http://www.eaipatterns.com/RecipientList.html>with two output channels. It > consumes messages off the input channel and > > publishes the unmodified message to both output channels. > > > > whereas our current Multicast, is as it's name suggests, a multicast, > which > > although is not mentioned in EIP patterns (that I can see right now), is > a > > well understood pattern, networky etc etc. > > > > Agree with Martin, the original name does seem so much more logical. > > > > > > On Thu, Dec 11, 2008 at 23:48, Martin Gilday <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > >> Is there a nabble/JIRA where this was discussed? It may have been > >> covered there but from the EIP book the description of a Wiretap is > >> different to what the multicast method did. The way I am using > >> multicast at the moment is very much for duplicating a message so that > >> two endpoints can recieve it and process it. The wiretap is described > >> more as a way of monitoring and testing. The original name seems more > >> meaningful to me. > >> > >> > >> ----- Original message ----- > >> From: "James Strachan (JIRA)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> To: [email protected] > >> Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2008 04:40:05 -0800 (PST) > >> Subject: [jira] Created: (CAMEL-1183) rename multicast -> wireTap in the > >> Java DSL and XML config? > >> > >> rename multicast -> wireTap in the Java DSL and XML config? > >> ----------------------------------------------------------- > >> > >> Key: CAMEL-1183 > >> URL: > >> https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/CAMEL-1183 > >> Project: Apache Camel > >> Issue Type: Improvement > >> Reporter: James Strachan > >> Fix For: 2.0.0 > >> > >> > >> I wonder if we should leave it deprecated in one release (say 1.6?) then > >> remove in 2.0? > >> > >> -- > >> This message is automatically generated by JIRA. > >> - > >> You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online. > >> > >> > > > > > > -- > James > ------- > http://macstrac.blogspot.com/ > > Open Source Integration > http://fusesource.com/ >
