Hi Florent, Antonio
Just one clarification ...
On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 11:59 AM, florent andré
<florent.andre-...@4sengines.com> wrote:
>
> comments on your restrictions :
>
>
> Such routes would have some restrictions: (a)
>>
>> start with a request,
>
>
> dou you mean a "user" (= curl like) request ?
> I don't think it as to be a "restriction" as some Camel inputs components
> are sort of "pool".
> For example "mail endpoint", "file endpoint", "ftp endpoint", etc...
>
> They not directly answer to a "direct request" but when something is send to
> the email address (or put in a directory), the full Enhancement Route is
> launched.
>
>
> (b) end with a response,
>
> Depending on you camel output, "end with a response" is not exactly true in
> an "classical resquest/reponse http thought"...
>
> I mean that the response of a "route" can be a mail sended or an rdf
> serialization write to an ftp...
>
>
> (c) run synchronously.
>
> Camel provide some tool for asynch.. but surely restrict to a synchronous
> processing is better on a first step (as maybe the previous restrictions)...
>
>
I was thinking about the possibility to map "routes" similar as chains
to the Enhancer RESTful interface
http://localhost:8080/enhancer/route/{route-name}
To do that routes would need to use the request as source and provide
the results as response.
In contrast Routes that are triggered by copying a file into a
directory or sending a mail to a special e-mail address will not be
mapped to the RESTful interface
best
Rupert
--
| Rupert Westenthaler rupert.westentha...@gmail.com
| Bodenlehenstraße 11 ++43-699-11108907
| A-5500 Bischofshofen
| REDLINK.CO
..........................................................................
| http://redlink.co/
