Serge Knystautas wrote:
>
> Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
> > > public void service(Mail mail);
> > >
> > > Comments?
> >
> > I'm against boolean-returning fuctions as a general pattern.
>
> Well, since I think we've made matching pretty flexible, maybe we should
> put the determination of whether a message stops after a given mailet
> back in the conf file. Again, I don't like returning a Mail object, and
> if we don't return boolean... maybe we do a flag in Mail to stop
> processing.
+1
>
> Looks like we're almost there... I need to put together a first whack at
> the MailetContext which would then give you access to the
> MailDispatcher. I'll probably just put in skeleton code as until we
> have the DTD structure for the conf file, I can't really grab a
> MailDispatcher object based on the mailet's name. Can't do this today,
> but probably tomorrow night.
>
> I'll leave you two to figure out what's the best exact XML
> representation for the matching/mailet config as you two have much more
> experience in this area. Seems like the general conf plan is just about
> ready to roll.
>
Good! I'm rolling back sources before ConectionManager pattern... it's
nice but needs much work ant sure that's not the right moment to mess up
things. Omero is enought for now.
I'm cleaning a bit sources and will add pluggable processing pipe today.
I was thinking about "hiding" that mailet in the .james.transport
package since it's different from other mailets.
Ok?
Fede
------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Archives and Other: <http://java.apache.org/>
Problems?: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
