Hey there,
I'm working on migrating the documentation regarding EIPs.

First, the granularity doesn't seem to be the same as in the former
documentation. For example, the Message Channel doesn't exist in the new
documentation. Another example is the Load Balancer EIP which is split into
several files in the new documentation.
This makes me think that it isn't a simple migration to asciidoctor, and
there is maybe a will to reorganize the documentation of EIPs.
Is it the case or can I add adoc files for elements that are not in the new
documentation folder?

Second, there are lots of links to other parts of the documentation that I
can't find anywhere. For example, the "Architecture" (
https://camel.apache.org/architecture.html) is referenced regularly, but I
can't find the section in the "camel-core" folder, nor under the docs
folder.
Does it mean the whole documentation has been reorganized?
Any thoughts or hints to find referenced pages?

Thanks a lot.
Regards.
Sebastien

2017-01-18 17:39 GMT+01:00 Luca Burgazzoli <lburgazz...@gmail.com>:

> 9) I'm currently going through the examples and tests trying to
> re-implement them using java 8 and see which part of the dsl can
> benefit from lambdas & co, I should open a new JIRA soon
>
> ---
> Luca Burgazzoli
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 9:48 AM, Nicola Ferraro <ni.ferr...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > 5) I started taking some tickets about spring-boot auto configuration
> >
> > I also plan to finish the component for reactive streams before we
> release.
> >
> > On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 9:44 AM, Antonin Stefanutti <
> anto...@stefanutti.fr>
> > wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> > On 16 Jan 2017, at 10:28, Claus Ibsen <claus.ib...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > 8)
> >> > That CDI JEE transaction PR on github.
> >> > Ideally we would have had a transaction API in camel-core and then one
> >> > impl for camel-spring, and then another for camel-cdi-jee. But that
> >> > may require too much work.
> >>
> >> I may be able to work on it unless anybody else want to take it.
> >>
> >> Antonin
> >>
> >>
> >>
>

Reply via email to