I also consider this as an bug. I propose to fix it in the way you mentioned and add a remark to the section "Changes that may affect end users" in [1].
[1] http://camel.apache.org/camel-2130-release.html Best, Christian ----------------- Software Integration Specialist Apache Member V.P. Apache Camel | Apache Camel PMC Member | Apache Camel committer Apache Incubator PMC Member https://www.linkedin.com/pub/christian-mueller/11/551/642 On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 7:23 AM, James Carman <[email protected]>wrote: > While mocking the HazelcastInstance objects in the test cases, I ran > into an interesting problem. The HazelcastInstanceConsumerTest was > @Ignored, stating that it messed up subsequent tests. Now that I'm > not using "live" HazelcastInstances, there is no reason to @Ignore > them anymore. However, when trying to get the tests to pass, I > noticed a strange irregularity. The route used to test the consumer > relied upon a header being set. The header was being set on the "out" > message, but the route was looking for it on the "in" message. Since > everything was ignored, we never ran into this before. I changed the > code to write "in" message headers instead and the test started > working. This *is* a regression and we can change it back (or perhaps > write the headers to the "out" message also) if need be, but I believe > the intent was to have the headers on the in message. How likely do > we think it is that folks are relying upon the "bug" functionality? > > James >
