Hi, I was reading quite a bit lately on both Mule 2.0 and Camel and trying to pinpoint the major differences / advantages / disadvantages at this point. The FAQ doc at http://activemq.apache.org/camel/how-does-camel-compare-to-mule.html as well as at http://activemq.apache.org/camel/is-camel-an-esb.html mention that Camel (+ ActiveMQ) can be considered ESB. On the other hand, I recall there was some article by James Strachan somewhere, which mentions that Camel is primarily the routing solution, while Mule (and ServiceMix) is more fully integrated ESB kind of thing that provides all kind of adapters and connectivity.
I'm not in for the name calling, whether Camel is ESB or not... What I'm trying to figure out is this: is there anything in Mule that is currently missing in Camel, beyond some transport adapters? It looks like the primary goal for both of these solutions was to implement EIP (I guess Camel project had explicit goal like that, while Mule project just naturally converged to it). Mule message handling is 100% SEDA based from what could be deduced from the documentation, while Camel seems to provide SEDA handling though the specific channel component. Are there any drawbacks / benefits beyond additional flexibility (and complexity)? So far I couldn't find anything from routing and message handling prospective what Mule can and Camel can't do. Am I missing smth? What are the most frequent use cases for both of these products, if there is anyone here who is using both Camel and Mule?.. Thanks, Vlad
