ppalaga commented on issue #1128: URL: https://github.com/apache/camel-quarkus/issues/1128#issuecomment-618279570
> * embedded (core) > > * routes are added to the camel context directly ... by the user > * context need to be programmatically configured ... by the user > * main > * routes and configuration classes are managed by camel-main > * support for command line > * support for configuration through properties > * static (aka lightweight) > * routes are added to the camel context directly By whom? > * some limitation may happen > * context need to be programmatically configured ... by the user? Which aspects of the context for example? > We can then provide main and static behaviour through extensions so depending of the end user need we may achieve different optimization or behaviours without cluttering the code too much. My standpoint is the same as in the past when we were introducing the main: If 80+% of Camel Quarkus users will be supposed to add dependency X, then the dependency should be present by default and the users do not need to know about the fine tuning unless they know what they do. Requiring a decision from the end users will cause unnecessary cognitive load and confusion. Having said that I vote for configuring core vs. main via application.properties rather than via dependencies. My very naive initial attitude to main vs. static is that we should have only one of them, probably only static. "some limitation may happen" could be presented as limitations of Camel Quarkus rather than a limitation of the single "static" mode. If ppl. need more flexibility they should be advised to choose another Camel platform. ---------------------------------------------------------------- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org
