mertdotcc commented on issue #4124: URL: https://github.com/apache/camel-k/issues/4124#issuecomment-1485688730
Thank you for the detailed response, really appreciate it! Couple of questions: 1. Why exactly do you think this shouldn't work in JVM mode? 2. `Integration.java` should not have a package name -> Why? Is it because it's not needed? If so, I give you that. But having it doesn't break anything. On the contrary, it helps with all the regular Java/Maven/IDE functionality. I am rather interested in your personal opinion on this. 3. `IntegrationBean` should be included in your dependency as it is not an integration but a Bean -> But I do have it as my dependency. [Here](https://github.com/mertdotcc/issue4124part1/blob/7018cfbbc0d614995e5e33a3da618a314d98daf8/src/main/java/com/mertdotcc/Integration.java#L5) and [here](https://github.com/mertdotcc/issue4124part1/blob/7018cfbbc0d614995e5e33a3da618a314d98daf8/pom.xml#L59). 4. You are right about the `CrashLoopBackOff`, it was a misconfiguration. And you make a good argument, I can't think of a proper need for the `container.port` trait option. 5. The component mapstruct is not yet supported by Camel-Quarkus, that's why it doesn't work in native mode -> that's a bummer. In the meantime, we will be forced to use it in the JVM mode then... 6. I moved `IntegrationBean` to your dependency -> Interesting... why exactly? Having it in the same project as the integration doesn't break anything. I understand that having it in the dependency also works, I am just curious about your thinking process. In the next 1-2 days I will pull in your code, test&analyze it, and share my findings and my follow-up questions (if any). But thank you so much for taking the time and looking into it! -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: [email protected]
