James 2.2.0a13

The only change is a fix for the NPE that Marco reported. --- Noel - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

cvs commit: james-server build.xml

noel2003/10/03 22:08:05 Modified:.Tag: branch_2_1_fcs build.xml Log: v2.2.0a13 Revision ChangesPath No revision No revision 1.116.2.16 +2 -2 james-server/build.xml Index: build.xml ===

cvs commit: james-server/src/java/org/apache/james/transport/matchers AbstractNetworkMatcher.java

noel2003/10/03 22:06:41 Modified:src/java/org/apache/james/transport/matchers Tag: branch_2_1_fcs AbstractNetworkMatcher.java Log: Handle case where no networks are provided, rather than NPE Revision ChangesPath No revision

RE: Message Locations

I think that what you want is IMAP but instead of having the store on a file you want it on the database. IMAP development in JAMES has been put on hold for quite a while now or at least is going much slower than the rest. -JM -Original Message- From: David Liles [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: RemoteDelivery progressively increasing delay-time

Noel J. Bergman wrote: > An reasonable approach, but wrong execution. Whenever you > have multiple > entries, the resulting value provided by the Mailet API > is going to be > a CSV (comma separated value) String whose order reflects the > order of the > elements. Therefore using a comma to del

Re: Excalibur Logger Improvements

Noel J. Bergman wrote: I know we can rotate on size, but what would be the easiest way to keep just the above sort of size limited log? Is there a suitable log implementation already provided? The way I deal with this is to create child loggers to seperate out thes

RE: Excalibur Logger Improvements

> >I know we can rotate on size, but what would be the easiest way to keep just > >the above sort of size limited log? Is there a suitable log implementation > >already provided? > The way I deal with this is to create child loggers to seperate out > these sort of concerns. In the SMTP server yo

Re: Excalibur Logger Improvements

Stephen McConnell wrote: Noel J. Bergman wrote: Stephen McConnell wrote: Noel J. Bergman wrote: While on this topic ... James is a Mailet container. We have a single log channel for all Mailet log messages. However, James might want to change the priority so that a particular maile

Re: Excalibur Logger Improvements

Noel J. Bergman wrote: Stephen McConnell wrote: Noel J. Bergman wrote: While on this topic ... James is a Mailet container. We have a single log channel for all Mailet log messages. However, James might want to change the priority so that a particular mailet uses DEBUG priority whil

RE: Db Columns

David Liles wrote: > In the inbox table that was created by James there is a > column "message_state". During initial testing to verify the > configuration all of the test messages sent show "root" as > the value for the column. What is the significance of this > column and how is the value man

Re: Db Columns

Hi David, That column is the name of the processor in your config.xml that the message is currently in. "root", "transport" , "error" , "spam" , etc... Kenny David Liles wrote: In the inbox table that was created by James there is a column "message_state". During initial testing to verify the c

RE: Excalibur Logger Improvements

Stephen McConnell wrote: > Noel J. Bergman wrote: > >While on this topic ... James is a Mailet container. We have a single log > >channel for all Mailet log messages. However, James might want to change > >the priority so that a particular mailet uses DEBUG priority while others > >are at the def

Db Columns

In the inbox table that was created by James there is a column "message_state". During initial testing to verify the configuration all of the test messages sent show "root" as the value for the column. What is the significance of this column and how is the value manipulated? I haven't found any

RE: RemoteDelivery progressively increasing delay-time

> You could work around this by optionally comma delimiting an attempts > value in the tag... An reasonable approach, but wrong execution. Whenever you have multiple entries, the resulting value provided by the Mailet API is going to be a CSV (comma separated value) String whose order reflects

Message Locations

I have configured James to use a database a the message repository. The question I have is how do I go about indicating where messages are stored when received for a location other then the inbox? eg: Allow users to create additional folders and then create message rules that automatically rou

Re: RemoteDelivery progressively increasing delay-time

Soeren Hilmer wrote: I do not really know how this process works, who has the final word on which of the proposed ways to do this, we go for? The person who does the work gets by far the most say. The community can suggest designs and may in special cases veto it. I like Serge's "attempts" vers

Re: RemoteDelivery progressively increasing delay-time

Regarding the timing of subsequent tries to overcome network failures, I have seen the phrase "exponential backoff strategy" used. I thought I had seen that in RFC 2821. But if it were there I expect Noel would have reported it. As I understand it, the delays in an exponential backoff strateg

RE: RemoteDelivery progressively increasing delay-time

Soeren Hilmer wrote: > I like Serge's "attempts" version best, But as Noel noted in his reponse to Serge, the Mailet API does not support it. You could work around this by optionally comma delimiting an attempts value in the tag... msecs [, attempts] 60 60, 3 > but in this case ar

Re: RemoteDelivery progressively increasing delay-time

Noel gave a reference to RFC-2821 which basically explains this need. It is often observed that servers not responding will do so shortly after, and if not they will probably not respond until very much later (if at all), so if multiple delay times are given James can use a more optimal delivery

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 23584] - Need an optional SMTP AUTH

DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT . ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bu

RE: RemoteDelivery progressively increasing delay-time

Noel J. Bergman wrote: > > This is not exposed to Mailet API components. We only get > [name,value]. As > noted in RemoteDelivery.init(), the resulting value is an > ordered CSV (which > answers a question Steve just asked). As noted in org.apache.james.transport.mailets.RemoteDelivery.init()? I

RE: RemoteDelivery progressively increasing delay-time

Why is it necessary to have a list of delay times to iterate through? Wouldn't it be simpler to just have a single delay time setting with the number to times to attempt to redeliver? -Original Message- From: Soeren Hilmer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 03, 2003 3:40 AM T

Re: RemoteDelivery progressively increasing delay-time

Hi, I do not really know how this process works, who has the final word on which of the proposed ways to do this, we go for? I like Serge's "attempts" version best, but in this case are maxRetries then to be disregarded? Or is it to be used on the last delaytime entry, if the attempts attribu