Return-Path: X-Original-To: archive-asf-public-internal@cust-asf2.ponee.io Delivered-To: archive-asf-public-internal@cust-asf2.ponee.io Received: from cust-asf.ponee.io (cust-asf.ponee.io [163.172.22.183]) by cust-asf2.ponee.io (Postfix) with ESMTP id 906E4200BEF for ; Wed, 4 Jan 2017 18:25:22 +0100 (CET) Received: by cust-asf.ponee.io (Postfix) id 8FB48160B3A; Wed, 4 Jan 2017 17:25:22 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: archive-asf-public@cust-asf.ponee.io Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by cust-asf.ponee.io (Postfix) with SMTP id D7FAD160B21 for ; Wed, 4 Jan 2017 18:25:21 +0100 (CET) Received: (qmail 14344 invoked by uid 500); 4 Jan 2017 17:25:20 -0000 Mailing-List: contact users-help@camel.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: users@camel.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list users@camel.apache.org Received: (qmail 14333 invoked by uid 99); 4 Jan 2017 17:25:20 -0000 Received: from pnap-us-west-generic-nat.apache.org (HELO spamd4-us-west.apache.org) (209.188.14.142) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 04 Jan 2017 17:25:20 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spamd4-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at spamd4-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTP id 20340C002D for ; Wed, 4 Jan 2017 17:25:20 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at spamd4-us-west.apache.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 2.285 X-Spam-Level: ** X-Spam-Status: No, score=2.285 tagged_above=-999 required=6.31 tests=[RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.972, URI_HEX=1.313] autolearn=disabled Received: from mx1-lw-us.apache.org ([10.40.0.8]) by localhost (spamd4-us-west.apache.org [10.40.0.11]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id IXjZS-VezMNp for ; Wed, 4 Jan 2017 17:25:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mbob.nabble.com (mbob.nabble.com [162.253.133.15]) by mx1-lw-us.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mx1-lw-us.apache.org) with ESMTP id A498B5FDC3 for ; Wed, 4 Jan 2017 17:25:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: from static.162.255.23.22.macminivault.com (unknown [162.255.23.22]) by mbob.nabble.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E7094398AAB5 for ; Wed, 4 Jan 2017 09:09:12 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2017 10:25:00 -0700 (MST) From: "Preben.Asmussen" To: users@camel.apache.org Message-ID: <1483550700452-5792151.post@n5.nabble.com> In-Reply-To: <1483424770512-5792083.post@n5.nabble.com> References: <1483424770512-5792083.post@n5.nabble.com> Subject: Re: Springboots vs Osgi // for Camel Apps MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit archived-at: Wed, 04 Jan 2017 17:25:22 -0000 I would surely recommend spring-boot. I't offers a lot of flexibility in terms of testing, deployment options and auto configuration. The developer experience is awesome, but it takes some time to get under the hood of all the Spring auto magic. That's something to be aware off. In the resent time there has been a move away from app. servers be it osgi or jee servers, towards more standalone and process oriented deployments, especially when you plan to deploy to docker and/or Kuberntes. I would be wary about putting to many containers in containers in containers. best, Preben -- View this message in context: http://camel.465427.n5.nabble.com/Springboots-vs-Osgi-for-Camel-Apps-tp5792083p5792151.html Sent from the Camel - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.