I wouldn't add them to the Exchange class at all, but to the constant class that every component seems to have (e.g FreemarkerConstants), as we seem to have done with most headers, what do you think?
I've also started a thread in camel-dev to discuss whether one should use constant interfaces, constant classes or enums for constants going forward. Thanks, On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 3:30 AM, Claus Ibsen <[email protected]> wrote: > We only provide constants for a few common names that are shared and > related to the HTTP/CXF components. > > We dont want to include / add more constants from other components > such as freemarker. > As we want to keep the number of names on org.apache.camel.Exchange to > a reasonable size. > > > > On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 11:20 PM, Fernando Ribeiro > <[email protected]> wrote: > > Any feedback yet? Thanks. > > > > On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 3:48 PM, Fernando Ribeiro < > > [email protected]> wrote: > > > >> All, > >> > >> I've been working on some changes and a question about whether having > >> constants for parameter names(e.g: "contentCache" and "encoding" in the > >> FreeMarker component) is as useful as I think it is. > >> > >> I find myself thinking "they should be the framework" every time I > create > >> these constants in my own code, and really think they belong there. > >> > >> What do you think? > >> > >> Thanks, > >> > >> Fernando > >> > >> > >> > > > > > > -- > Claus Ibsen > ----------------- > FuseSource > Email: [email protected] > Web: http://fusesource.com > CamelOne 2011: http://fusesource.com/camelone2011/ > Twitter: davsclaus, fusenews > Blog: http://davsclaus.blogspot.com/ > Author of Camel in Action: http://www.manning.com/ibsen/ >
