You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@activemq.apache.org by "dr.jeff" <jl...@systechnologies.com> on 2007/05/22 15:09:43 UTC

[camel]

What is the relation of Camel to ServiceMix-EIP?
Is one somehow the historical ancestor of the other? 
Or are they intended to be equivalent functionality, but in different
settings?
-- 
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/-camel--tf3796253s2354.html#a10737590
Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Re: [camel]

Posted by James Strachan <ja...@gmail.com>.
On 5/22/07, dr.jeff <jl...@systechnologies.com> wrote:
>
> Yes.
>
> Also, ServiceMix EIP had xpath splitter, which I didn't see in Camel?

Thats more a case of bad documentation :) I've tried to fix that...
http://cwiki.apache.org/CAMEL/splitter.html

e.g.

from("activemq:foo.bar").splitter(xpath("//foo/bar")).to("file://whatnot")

i.e. the splitter takes any expression...
http://cwiki.apache.org/CAMEL/expression.html

-- 
James
-------
http://macstrac.blogspot.com/

Re: [camel]

Posted by "dr.jeff" <jl...@systechnologies.com>.
Yes. 

Also, ServiceMix EIP had xpath splitter, which I didn't see in Camel?


James.Strachan wrote:
> 
> ...
> We should probably
> integrate Camel into ServiceMix as the preferred EIP solution and
> consider deprecating (or at least merging) the ServiceMix EIP
> functionality.
> 
> -- 
> James
> -------
> http://macstrac.blogspot.com/
> 
> 

-- 
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/-camel--tf3796253s2354.html#a10737911
Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Re: [camel]

Posted by James Strachan <ja...@gmail.com>.
On 5/22/07, dr.jeff <jl...@systechnologies.com> wrote:
> What is the relation of Camel to ServiceMix-EIP?
> Is one somehow the historical ancestor of the other?
> Or are they intended to be equivalent functionality, but in different
> settings?

ServiceMix EIP was the ancestor; they both do similar things. The main
difference with ServiceMix EIP is its inttegrated into the existing
ServiceMix XBean XML stuff; whereas Camel has more EIP coverage and
can be used outside of JBI (e.g. just with pure JMS or MINA)...
http://activemq.apache.org/camel/enterprise-integration-patterns.html

Also Camel supports Java or XML configuration. We should probably
integrate Camel into ServiceMix as the preferred EIP solution and
consider deprecating (or at least merging) the ServiceMix EIP
functionality.

-- 
James
-------
http://macstrac.blogspot.com/