camel-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Steve Huston <shus...@riverace.com>
Subject RE: [FEEDBACK] - Apache Camel 3 - camel-core vs camel-core-lite vs camel-core-all
Date Tue, 05 Mar 2019 15:49:37 GMT
My assumption is that camel-core (all in one) doesn't have any negative affect on Camel itself
and that breaking it up is motivated by a benefit to those projects that want to reduce size.

If that is true, then I recommend leaving camel-core as it is in 2.x - that reduces surprises
to all users and prevents a huge bunch of "hey, you broke my app in 3.0" emails to the list.
Those applications that want to reduce size can make some simple dependency changes.

As a more personal preference, please don't call anything "-lite" - it is way overused and
smacks of "cheap, crappy alternative to the real one." Call it camel-base or camel-minimal.

-Steve

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Claus Ibsen <claus.ibsen@gmail.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, March 05, 2019 3:49 AM
> To: users@camel.apache.org
> Subject: [FEEDBACK] - Apache Camel 3 - camel-core vs camel-core-lite vs
> camel-core-all
> 
> Hi
> 
> As you may know Apache Camel 3 development is underway, and part of the
> work is to modularize camel-core into smaller modules, where the major
> work has been done for the M1 release. This means that 95% of the core
> components from camel-core has been moved out, eg camel-log, camel-
> seda, camel-direct etc.
> 
> Now we want to have a camel-core dependency that are tiny and would like
> feedback on different styles
> 
> 1)
> Keep camel-core dependency as in Camel 2.x which has dependency on all
> the core components (known as camel-core-all) AND introduce a new camel-
> core-lite that has minimal dependencies so you can pick and choose only the
> dependencies you need.
> 
> 2)
> Keep camel-core as a lite dependency and introduce a new camel-core-all
> that has all the core components and is similar to camel 2.x. This means that
> users would need to migrate from using camel-core => camel-core-all OR add
> only the extra core components they use, eg camel-direct, camel-seda, etc.
> 
> 3)
> Do #1 and move towards #2 in the future.
> 
> We can add a new camel-core-all dependency that has all the core
> components etc, and then let camel-core depend on this dependency. And
> then we can also add the camel-core-lite module as well. Then if we one day
> switch camel-core from the ALL to the LITE style, we can do that out of the
> box, for example for Camel 4 ;)
> 
> Note: One issue with the name camel-core-all is that it smells like it has all the
> core modules, but it will not include camel-core-osgi or camel-core-xml as
> they are only needed when you add camel-spring or camel-blueprint (for
> XML and/or OSGi support).
> 
> Well just thinking out loud a bit, here in the morning after a couple of cup of
> coffees.
> 
> Any thoughts and feedback is much welcome.
> 
> 
> --
> Claus Ibsen
> -----------------
> http://davsclaus.com @davsclaus
> Camel in Action 2: https://www.manning.com/ibsen2
Mime
View raw message