I like multicast more than WireTap.
+1 to keep multicast until we find a more suit word.

Willem

James Strachan wrote:
> 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.
>>>
>>>
> 
> 
> 

Reply via email to