Documenting expected behavior with certain potential collisions

[bfitzpat]

So while working on vscode-camelk, we ran across some potential pitfalls as far as route file naming and deployment. Here are the first three cases we've identified:

1. User deploys two routes with different filenames that sanitize to the same integration name
2. User deploys two routes from two different folders that have the same name (or resolve to the same sanitized name)
3. User deploys a route, renames the route file, and re-deploys the route

I ran through these cases using the camel-k executable.

Case 1

$ ls
my-route.groovy  MyRoute.groovy
$ kamel run MyRoute.groovy
integration "my-route" created
$ kamel run my-route.groovy
integration "my-route" updated

Case 2

$ kamel run ./folder1/myroute.groovy
integration "myroute" created
$ kamel run ./folder2/myroute.groovy
integration "myroute" updated

Case 3

$ kamel run MyRouteToRename.groovy
integration "my-route-to-rename" created
$ mv MyRouteToRename.groovy MyRouteRenamed.groovy
$ kamel run MyRouteRenamed.groovy
integration "my-route-renamed" created

What we are looking for is a better understanding of the limitations of the Camel-K platform. We think these are pretty common cases. Are they working as intended? Or are these issues to be resolved?

[github-actions]

This issue has been automatically marked as stale due to 90 days of inactivity.
It will be closed if no further activity occurs within 15 days.
If you think that’s incorrect or the issue should never stale, please simply write any comment.
Thanks for your contributions!