Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
>
> No, the problem is that Servlets = HTTPServlet. If we change the name to
> "mailets" of shit like that, this will _always_ be the case.
>
> Anyway, if we precisely outline the differences between the two models,
> it's going to be easier to _merge_ them in the future because more and
> more people will understand their similarities and differences.
>
> I think servlet is a protocol abstract name. Servlet = httpServlet is
> wrong. We should not fail to provide better alternatives to this
> reasoning, since we can.
At this point in time? I can't care less...
I spent the first two months of my permanence in the US discussing @ Sun
about mailservlets.... And let me say... I give up...
No more time, zero interest and no will to keep banging on a wall...
Sorry... I'm burned out...
Pier
--
--------------------------------------------------------------------
- P I E R -
stable structure erected over water to allow the docking of seacraft
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://www.betaversion.org/~pier/>
--------------------------------------------------------------------
- ApacheCON Y2K: Come to the official Apache developers conference -
-------------------- <http://www.apachecon.com> --------------------
------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Archives and Other: <http://java.apache.org/>
Problems?: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
