On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 10:55 PM, boday <ben.o...@initekconsulting.com> wrote: > my take is that unless you explicitly need any Servicemix features, then just > use Karaf because its lighter weight, etc... >
Karaf is a general purpose container which is not preset/preconfigured for optimal Camel runtime. You would need to configure this yourself. Apache ServiceMix is a one stop solution that incorporates CXF, AMQ, Camel, etc. in a known and stable working set. If you assemble Karaf + Camel + CXF etc yourself then you can run into issues and whatnot. That said over the recent time Karaf have improved to better cater for feature version ranges, etc. But you can be on a big goose hunt to fiddle with jre.properties and whatnot to comment in/out various API from the JDK to get anything working on Karaf. Apache ServiceMix 5 will become much ligher when we ditch the JBI baggage, and in the upcoming 4.4 release Apache ServiceMix (AFAIK) offers different profiles, so you can have a light, medium, full distribution. > > diwakar wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> Thanks for the replies. >> >> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/6930236/apache-karaf-vs-servicemix has >> >> the two primary reason for using ServiceMix is if you want 1) >> an ESB, 2) NMR (a feature that allows you to community between bundles AND >> instances of Karaf) >> AFAIK Camel does not use servicemix NMR and Camel itself is like >> an ESB. >> It is still not clear how hosting Camel in Servicemix 4.x is >> better than Karaf. >> >> With Best Regards, >> Diwakar >> > > > ----- > Ben O'Day > IT Consultant -http://consulting-notes.com > > -- > View this message in context: > http://camel.465427.n5.nabble.com/Karaf-vs-Servicemix-4-x-tp4954984p4956433.html > Sent from the Camel - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > -- Claus Ibsen ----------------- FuseSource Email: cib...@fusesource.com Web: http://fusesource.com Twitter: davsclaus, fusenews Blog: http://davsclaus.blogspot.com/ Author of Camel in Action: http://www.manning.com/ibsen/
