Hi Christian, I was a bit confused by the documentation (does the direct-vm contain a copy/paste error ? It basically says the same as on the vm page). Both "support communication across CamelContext instances" but yet they differ ? It's also not clear that both can be used for inter OSGI bundle communication.
*VM* VM supports communication across CamelContext instances - so you can use this mechanism to communicate across web applications (provided that camel-core.jar is on the system/boot classpath). *Direct-VM* This component differs from the Direct component in that Direct-VM supports communication across CamelContext instances - so you can use this mechanism to communicate across web applications (provided that camel-core.jar is on the system/boot classpath). I used the direct-vm and it does work accross bundles. However, in our case we have 1 Camel route defined in a OSGI bundle (bootstrapped using spring using an OSGI blueprint extender), while another Camel route is defined in a WAR file (the osgi frameworks wraps the war file in an OSGI bundle). I noticed that the route from the WAR file can not send messages using direct-vm to a route in a bundle. A route from a bundle can send a message to a route in another bundle. So I guess I have 2 options : 1. Move the camel route from the WAR into an actual OSGI bundle, put everything in the same EBA and use vm or direct-vm 2. Keep the 2 EBAs seperate (isolated) and integrate them using JMS. -- View this message in context: http://camel.465427.n5.nabble.com/Integrating-2-deployable-units-containing-camel-routes-tp5729827p5729841.html Sent from the Camel - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
