My short summary, ActiveMQ is an open source, enterprise messaging provider that conforms to the JMS 1.1 specification.
Camel is an open source integration framework. At its core it is an implementation of Enterprise Integration Patterns<http://www.enterpriseintegrationpatterns.com/>(EIP) by Gregor Hohpe upon which numerous folks around the planet have added integration consumer and producer extensions that provide the connectivity options for the EIP message channels. As such, Camel would provide the integration layer to ActiveMQ in place of hand writing the JMS clients. Does that help? On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 12:58 PM, Donald Whytock <dwhyt...@gmail.com> wrote: > My understanding is that ActiveMQ can serve as a host for JMS message > queues, supporting applications that use them. Camel isn't meant as a > host for JMS queueing as much as a listener to a JMS queue. > > Don > > On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 1:34 PM, prasun.sultania > <prasun.sulta...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > I am a beginner. I have a very question to ask: > > > > Camel has got almost all the components described in EIP such as message > > routing, Point to Point Channel and Publish-Subscribe channel. > > > > Still why do we need ActiveMQ when Camel has got everything? > > What difference does ActiveMQ makes? > > > > -- > > View this message in context: > http://camel.465427.n5.nabble.com/Difference-Between-ActiveMQ-and-Camel-tp5713797.html > > Sent from the Camel - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > -- -- Scott England-Sullivan ---------------------------------- FuseSource Web: http://www.fusesource.com Blog: http://sully6768.blogspot.com Twitter: sully6768
