On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 3:10 PM, Jon Anstey<jans...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I don't think you should be taking route definitions from one camel context
> and loading them into another... I'm surprised this actually works! Also,
> I'm not really following why you need a 2nd context to set the id... did you
> try just using one?
>
The "hidden" and advanced stuff such as interceptors / on exception
and the likes is not easy to distill back as there is special code in
Camel to take core of the routes is assembled correctly according to
how big impacts such cross cutting features impose.
So I do think the dynamic editor at present time should *not* have
such features to express. If we can do it for regular routes with then
we got far.
In the future we can have a better model that caters for tooling for
cross cutting functions such as interceptors.
> On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 10:19 AM, xueqiang.mi <allo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> I found that the addRouteDefinitions method of camel context caused this
>> problem. It seems that this method transform the interceptDefinition into a
>> interceptStrategy.
>> Before updating a route, I use a temporary camel context to generate the
>> route definition from a route builder, so I can obtain the route definition
>> and reserve its id. Code is as follows:
>> {code}
>> // add the route builder into a temporary camel context
>> CamelContext tempContext = new DefaultCamelContext();
>> tempContext.addRoutes(builder);
>> // get all the added routes and add them into current context
>> List<RouteDefinition> routeDefinitions =
>> tempContext.getRouteDefinitions();
>> for (int i = 0; i < routeDefinitions.size(); i++) {
>> RouteDefinition routeDefinition = routeDefinitions.get(i);
>> // set id only for the first route
>> if (i == 0)
>> routeDefinition.setId(id);
>>
>> // add or update the route
>>
>>
>> getCamelContext().addRouteDefinitions(Collections.singletonList(routeDefinition));
>> }
>> {code}
>>
>> Then the addRouteDefinitions method is used to add the route definition to
>> current camel context and it causes that problem: transforming the
>> interceptDefinition into a interceptStrategy. Through test, this operation
>> has brought some other similar problems for other DSLs.
>>
>> Are there any suggestions to solve it?
>>
>> xueqiang.mi wrote:
>> >
>> > Hi,
>> > When I tested the intercept DSL, I encountered a problem.
>> > I found sometimes the route maintains the intercept definition as a
>> output
>> > processor in outputs list, but sometimes, it hold the intercept
>> > configuration in its interceptStrategies list. I don't what causes the
>> > difference and how to differentiate them.
>> >
>> >
>> > JIRA j...@apache.org wrote:
>> >>
>> >> groovy renderer
>> >> ---------------
>> >>
>> >> Key: CAMEL-1392
>> >> URL:
>> >> https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/CAMEL-1392
>> >> Project: Apache Camel
>> >> Issue Type: Sub-task
>> >> Reporter: James Strachan
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
>> >> -
>> >> You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>>
>> --
>> View this message in context:
>> http://www.nabble.com/-jira--Created%3A-%28CAMEL-1392%29-groovy-renderer-tp22220288p24954096.html
>> Sent from the Camel Development mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Jon
>
> http://janstey.blogspot.com/
>
--
Claus Ibsen
Apache Camel Committer
Open Source Integration: http://fusesource.com
Blog: http://davsclaus.blogspot.com/
Twitter: http://twitter.com/davsclaus
