Hi Lou,
Camel is a great tool to solve a lot of integration problem. It allows
us to easily implement EIP (Enterprise Integration Pattern). Basicly,
Camel is the "SMX standard" when you need to implement advanced routing
(content routing, multi recipient, etc), transformation (for example
using velocity templating language) and filter (content filter, etc).
Nevertheless, only Camel isn't a workflow engine and so give a limited
answer to design a real business workflow.
Typically, a workflow engine use a database backend to maintain state
between each workflow steps. Using a workflow engine, you can define
condition, loop etc between each workflow stage.
In fact Camel can be use in some workflow steps but can't manage the
whole workflow alone.
If I need to compare osworkflow to another tool it would be ODE. In fact
ODE is BPEL engine and using BPEL (Business Process Execution Language)
you can describe a workflow.
I hope that I was clear :)
Regards
JB
Lou Parisi wrote:
I was wondering if anyone could give me the use case/scenario where you would
select osworkflow for executing a workflow in servicemix vs. using either
static or dynamic routes with camel. It seems Camel is well integrated with
servicemix and provides a significant amount of functionality so I would
think camel is the standard. Assuming that is true, when would one choose
osworkflow over camel?
I am considering an application that requires a workflow to execute several
applications in sequence. I would wrap the existing applications as
services in servicemix.
Thanks for any comments/opinions. Lou
--
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
---------------------------------
HomePage
http://www.nanthrax.net
---------------------------------
Contacts
[email protected]
[email protected]
---------------------------------
OpenSource
BuildProcess/AutoDeploy
http://buildprocess.sourceforge.net
Apache ServiceMix
http://servicemix.apache.org
-----------------------------------
PGP : 17D4F086
