Re: thoughts on the method names for the requestBody and requestBodyAndHeader etc

[Hadrian Zbarcea <hz...@gmail.com>]

+1

I don't think we need to deprecate it for the 2.0 release.  If we have  
a good solution let's go with it now.
If not it will need to wait until the next major release.

Hadrian


On Jun 12, 2009, at 12:43 AM, Claus Ibsen wrote:

> On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 3:51 PM, Ryan Gardner<ry...@gmail.com>  
> wrote:
>> I would suggest @deprecating it for the 2.0 release and work to  
>> remove them
>> all by 2.1 (or even if they were all removed, a .t least let users  
>> have some
>> time to make the migration)
>
> Well its now we have the time to do it as its a new major release.
> Going for 1.x to 2.0.
> I would *not* like to have a lot of @deprecated methods in a central
> class such as ProducerTemplate
> and having them around until Camel 2.5/3.x comes along. And having to
> add 10x new methods to a ever growing list
> of methods. We already have to many in this class.
>
> So its now or wait till next major release.
>
>
>>
>> On Jun 10, 2009 3:12 AM, "Claus Ibsen" <cl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi
>>
>> I just did a quick grep for "AndHeader" in unit tests.
>> We use it 554 times. So it will affect many files if we do a rename.
>>
>> On Sat, Apr 4, 2009 at 8:38 AM, Ryan Gardner<ry...@gmail.com>  
>> wrote:
>>
>>> The requestBody method makes sense (it requests a body) - but >
>> "requestBodyAndHeader" and "reques...
>> --
>>
>> Claus Ibsen Apache Camel Committer Open Source Integration:
>> http://fusesource.com Blog: http://davs...
>>
>
>
>
> -- 
> Claus Ibsen
> Apache Camel Committer
>
> Open Source Integration: http://fusesource.com
> Blog: http://davsclaus.blogspot.com/
> Twitter: http://twitter.com/davsclaus