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
