2008/12/11 Ramon Buckland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > 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()
Using to*() is confusing as to(uri1, uri2, uri3) effectively makes a pipeline (not a multicast/wiretap thingy) > parallel() / inParallel() and this implies parallel processing :) > multiSend() > megaCopy() ;-) :) Naming is so hard! Refresh my memory - what is it about wireTap that doesn't suit? (If you maybe swizzle your understanding of wire tap to be - send a copy of the same message to N destinations rather than just 2 :) -- James ------- http://macstrac.blogspot.com/ Open Source Integration http://fusesource.com/
