Raul,
I agree with your suggestion. Actually what you suggest is already
partially implemented, or at lest support for that (including support
for relatively painless migration).
However, before we discuss a solution we need to agree on the principle.
I don't think we did that, reason why this issue keeps popping up. The
lazy consensus from the past may not be sufficient.
Even now, I don't know if we should interpret the few +1s during the
past week in this thread as lazy consensus. I will start a vote and we
can start flashing out a solution.
Cheers,
Hadrian
On 06/19/2012 06:46 PM, Raul Kripalani wrote:
I know that the discussion at hand is not exactly related to what I'm
going to propose. But I'll blurt out my idea just to enrich the debate
;)
Endpoint options can be applicable to producers, consumers or both.
Currently, the validation of the applicability is done in code - if
lucky. I even luckier, the component page will tag options according
to what they are applicable to. Unfortunately, it's not always the
case. Look at camel-jms for instance.
I suggest that we add annotations to the API to decorate the fields
representing the options in the Endpoint class, to indicate what they
are applicable to.
We can then add some automatic validation logic and reporting based on
the annotations.
WDYT?
Raúl.
On 19 Jun 2012, at 22:08, Ioannis Canellos<ioca...@gmail.com> wrote:
Do we have a brief estimate of how many components do not use clean URIs?
--
*Ioannis Canellos*
*
FuseSource<http://fusesource.com>
**
Blog: http://iocanel.blogspot.com
**
Twitter: iocanel
*
