On Fri, Sep 24, 2010 at 2:51 PM, <patrice.god...@orange-ftgroup.com> wrote:
>> "But the Camel routing engine will automatic handle using IN if there
>> is no OUT message."
>
> So this is the magic behind! :-)
> I don't remember reading this anywhere previously and I was wondering how
> data was flowing from in to out messages.
>
>>
>> Working on IN is just much easier to explain and use for end users.
>
> Honestly it was confusing to me.
> Writing something to an "in" message to make it go "out" was really confusing
> to me.
>
Yeah the API is not optimal there. We have debated this many times on
the dev forums.
I personally would remove the IN and OUT and only keen one message.
getMessage()
But the current API is kinda stuck due it been there since 1.0 and the
old legacy from JBI and whatnot.
>
>
> *********************************
> This message and any attachments (the "message") are confidential and
> intended solely for the addressees.
> Any unauthorised use or dissemination is prohibited.
> Messages are susceptible to alteration.
> France Telecom Group shall not be liable for the message if altered, changed
> or falsified.
> If you are not the intended addressee of this message, please cancel it
> immediately and inform the sender.
> ********************************
>
>
--
Claus Ibsen
Apache Camel Committer
Author of Camel in Action: http://www.manning.com/ibsen/
Open Source Integration: http://fusesource.com
Blog: http://davsclaus.blogspot.com/
Twitter: http://twitter.com/davsclaus
