Hi So are you referring to some configuration for service call / hystrix etc?
The problem with the registry being hierarchical is that its backed by different implementations and then the user experience is different depending on which beans you get. For example CDI/spring has all kind of dependency injection magic, where as a basic map registry cannot do anything. So it sounds more like you are looking for an internal generic registry? On Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 6:21 PM, Luca Burgazzoli <lburgazz...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hello everyone, > > I'm wondering if it would make sense to have a sort of hierarchical > registry where the root registry is always created by the CamelContext > then the specific container registry adds its own registry on top and > the lookup would be top down. > > The motivation is that there are some beans that are only used by > camel and the registry is always involved so it does not make much > sense to have them available also on the container, i.e. the > ServiceCall and Hystrix configured through XML. > > This would reduce the complexity to add new definitions to the XML as > one do not need to create a container specific parser (blueprint, > spring, cdi) for object that are strictly camel-context related. > > What do you think ? > > --- > Luca Burgazzoli -- Claus Ibsen ----------------- http://davsclaus.com @davsclaus Camel in Action 2: https://www.manning.com/ibsen2
