The point I was trying to make was not what you described in your #2 (although what you said there is true). However, Artemis isn't simply for legacy HornetQ users. Numerous modifications and updates have been made to Artemis to make migration for ActiveMQ 5.x users smoother (although much work is still to be done).
My point was that just because Artemis 1.0 was released in June you shouldn't necessarily consider it a risk to adopt since it is largely based on code that's baked in a (non-Apache) community for the better part of 6 years now. As far as integration goes, both ActiveMQ 5.x and Artemis are multi-protocol brokers so depending on what protocol you want to use will determine, in large part, how you integrate. Artemis supports JMS 1.0, 1.1, & 2.0 and well as STOMP 1.0 & 1.1, AMQP 1.0, and has initial support for OpenWire (the ActiveMQ 5.x protocol). You asked about Fuse, but Fuse isn't an Apache project so I think you'd be better off asking those guys on their own lists. Justin ----- Original Message ----- From: "BN" <bnalla...@gmail.com> To: users@activemq.apache.org Sent: Thursday, November 12, 2015 12:35:43 PM Subject: Re: Difference between ActiveMQ vs Apache ActiveMQ Artemis Thanks Gents for the posts. >From what I gather are two points 1. If an organization is risk averse then they should stick to ActiveMQ 2. Artemis code base comes from HornetQ and so Artemis would be a natural transition for people who are comfortable or have previous experience working with HornetQ. I have one last question and that is the role of FUSE. 1. What are the standard techniques of integrating your Java code with ActiveMQ? 2. I know Fuse is part of JBoss EAP 7.x and with introduction of Fuse will the access to ActiveMQ be changed? Thanks once again for all the support. Regards BN -- View this message in context: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/Difference-between-ActiveMQ-vs-Apache-ActiveMQ-Artemis-tp4703828p4703916.html Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
