Yeah, you can use it without the JBI layer if you want. However, the main drawback I can see about that is that you won't have any component available for the NMR, but using camel of cxf. In such a case you could also only use Camel, else you'd have to rewrite all the components yourself.
2009/3/26 bquenin <[email protected]>: > > Hi, > > I have a question about the SMX4 NMR. I had a look to the source code and > it seems that the SMX4 NMR relies on 2 main parts which are: > - A "non-jbi" NMR (org.apache.servicemix.nmr.api + > org.apache.servicemix.nmr.core):these 2 modules provide most of the features > of a JBI NMR but don't rely on JBI interfaces at all. > - A "JBI wrapper" on top of the "non-JBI" NMR (most notably > org.apache.servicemix.jbi.runtime): this module implements the JBI > interfaces and implementation is sort of a wrapper of the "non-JBI" NMR. > > I'm really interested into the non JBI NMR because it's really lightweight > and seems to offer most of the feature you can expect from the JBI NMR > without sticking to the standard (it may sounds weird for most of you guys, > but it's a strength in my context). > My main concern is that I don't know if this non JBI is intended to be used > as is. It seems to be the case since it's well separated from the other one > and offer clear interfaces and stuff. It's even possible to create samples > that uses this non JBI NMR and they works fine. > However, despites it's possible to do it technically, I don't know if this > kind of usage is encouraged or not ? > > Could you please tell me if it's possible to use it as is and if there are > any potential drawbacks by doing so ? > > Thanks, > BQ. > > -- > View this message in context: > http://www.nabble.com/SMX4-NMR---Usage-tp22725677p22725677.html > Sent from the ServiceMix - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > -- Cheers, Guillaume Nodet ------------------------ Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/ ------------------------ Open Source SOA http://fusesource.com
