James 2.2.0 was posted to dist/. I'll work on the site docs tomorrow, and
we can do the announcement after the mirrors have had time to pickup the
distribution.
--- Noel
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For a
noel2004/06/15 19:42:08
Modified:src/conf Tag: branch_2_1_fcs james-config.xml
Log:
revert to 1.40.2.24
Revision ChangesPath
No revision
No revision
1.40.2.26 +4 -4 james-server/src/conf/james-config.xml
Index: james-c
noel2004/06/15 19:33:35
Modified:src/xdocs Tag: branch_2_1_fcs index.xml
Log:
minor changes so that the included index at least says that 2.2.0 is current
Revision ChangesPath
No revision
No revision
1.23.2.9 +5 -9 james-s
Steve Brewin wrote:
Back in December 2002 the primary J2EE servers (BEA WebLogic and IBM
WebSphere) used by the larger institutions required JDK 1.3.x and I argued
we should too. Current releases of BEA WebLogic and IBM WebSphere require
JDK 1.4.x and I would now argue that this should be our mini
t-launcher.jar:/usr/local/gump/public/workspace/ant/dist/lib/ant-nodeps.jar:/usr/local/gump/public/workspace/ant/dist/lib/ant.jar:/usr/local/gump/packages/javamail-1.3/mail.jar:/usr/local/gump/public/workspace/avalon/framework/target/avalon-framework-20040615.jar:/usr/local/gump/public/workspace/aval
(Ought to be JDK 1.3 or 1.4 redux)
This was an issue thrashed over in December 2002. My main argument then
remains my main argument now. Larger institutions are very conservative in
moving JDKs. If we feel that they are or could be a significant part of the
user base we should not freeze them out
Yep - and I just tested again with a 10k attachment in case I did
something stupid before - and that worked fine.
Steve
-Original Message-
From: Noel J. Bergman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, June 15, 2004 9:50 AM
To: James Developers List
Subject: RE: Error storing in Oracle D
> > Our code currently presumes something of a pull-model, and would
> > need some changes. The best approach would be to support both
> > socket I/O and selector I/O.
> Therein lies the problem though... since they are different models,
> it's non-trivial to support both.
If we do the work to s
Hi I am using James 2.2.0.RC5
I did the following in my config.xml file
]>
I added the last line in the above block of code. and later on after
"&fetchmailConfig;" I added "&fetchSpamRules;"
the reason is because I want to run a java class when james starts up at the
very first time.
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
NIO: This is a technology we could have if we upgraded to JDK 1.4. I'm
not sure what you mean... we are not using it since we cannot use it
Architecturally, we would have to change. Our code currently presumes
something of a pull-model, and would need some changes. The bes
> NIO: This is a technology we could have if we upgraded to JDK 1.4. I'm
> not sure what you mean... we are not using it since we cannot use it
Architecturally, we would have to change. Our code currently presumes
something of a pull-model, and would need some changes. The best approach
would b
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
There's NIO, built in JNDI DNS library, TLS capabilities. What about
requiring 1.4 for james 3.0?
We aren't using NIO, yet, there is no support for TLS with NIO in JDK 1.4
(requires JDK 1.*5*), we have better DNS support from dnsjava, and we
already have TLS in the current c
> There's NIO, built in JNDI DNS library, TLS capabilities. What about
> requiring 1.4 for james 3.0?
We aren't using NIO, yet, there is no support for TLS with NIO in JDK 1.4
(requires JDK 1.*5*), we have better DNS support from dnsjava, and we
already have TLS in the current code.
Not seeing a
> Ah c'mon, you work on James and don't speak Italian? :)
> "Non vi sono altri dati da leggere nel socket"
> There is no more data to read from the socket.
I shoulda tried babelfish ... :-\
See JAMES-56. Does that offer any clues? See also JAMES-247, where Steve
Short had replied that he specif
Serge knows italian very well!i am sorry, I forgot to translate.This is from the spoolManager log:15/06/04 18:25:42 ERROR spoolmanager: Exception in processor javax.mail.MessagingException: Exception caught while storing mail Container: java.sql.SQLException: Non vi sono altri dati da leggere nel
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
What does the error say in English? Looked like something to do with a
socket?
Ah c'mon, you work on James and don't speak Italian? :)
"Non vi sono altri dati da leggere nel socket"
There is no more data to read from the socket.
--
Serge Knystautas
Lokitech >> software . str
> Had you tried using Oracle before the 2.2.X version? I've never tested
> with Oracle, but supposedly there was a bunch of work done last month
> specifically to support Oracle.
What does the error say in English? Looked like something to do with a
socket?
--- Noel
--
Yes, I used version 2.1.3.The message body in that version is defined as longrow. When I redifined it as blob I get the same error. It's just for this reson I passed to version 2.2.0RC5.This is the version for blob support.Did you ever get any problem storing in DB repository big mail? Gianmarco M.
Message:
A new issue has been created in JIRA.
-
View the issue:
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JAMES-298
Here is an overview of the issue:
-
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have done a test with ojdbc14.jar.
I still have the same error.
Any ideas?
Had you tried using Oracle before the 2.2.X version? I've never tested
with Oracle, but supposedly there was a bunch of work done last month
specifically to support Oracle.
--
Serge Knystautas
I have done a test with ojdbc14.jar.I still have the same error.Any ideas?thx, Gianmarco M.Serge Knystautas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>06/15/2004 11:28 AM ASTPlease respond to "James Developers List" To: James Developers List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> cc: bcc: Subject: Re: Error storing in Oracle DB reposit
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm using James 2.2.0RC5 and I defined a DB Mail repository on Oracle
9.2.0.4.0. When I try to store a mail bigger than 2k I get:
exception! javax.mail.MessagingException: Exception caught while storing
mail Container: java.sql.SQLException: Non vi sono altri dati da legger
Hi,
I'm using James 2.2.0RC5 and I defined a DB Mail repository on Oracle
9.2.0.4.0. When I try to store a mail bigger than 2k I get:
exception! javax.mail.MessagingException: Exception caught while storing
mail Container: java.sql.SQLException: Non vi sono altri dati da leggere
nel socket.
And ja
Hi.
I'm a James user and I think you don't need ask your user. Windows users
are threatened continously with new viruses because 90% of them do never
update their systems. If you think the best for James is updating to JVM
1.4, excellent :) Also, you must remember old JVM versions had security
Danny Angus wrote:
There's NIO, built in JNDI DNS library, TLS capabilities. What about
requiring 1.4 for james 3.0?
+1
What about asking our users to see if we have an issue or not first??
I'm not saying to avoid their input, but not treat it as the basis for
the decision.
Similarly, if we made
> I know Danny is stuck with JDK 1.3. :)
I'm not stuck with 1.3 actually, but I know that people are, and understand
why.
> There's NIO, built in JNDI DNS library, TLS capabilities. What about
> requiring 1.4 for james 3.0?
> +1
What about asking our users to see if we have an issue or no
On Tuesday 15 June 2004 15:19, Serge Knystautas wrote:
> Danny Angus wrote:
> > I think we'd need to poll our users explicitly first.
> > There are still good reasons for not doing so unless we really *need* to.
> >
> > -1 (It is not a good indication)
>
> I know Danny is stuck with JDK 1.3. :)
>
Danny Angus wrote:
I think we'd need to poll our users explicitly first.
There are still good reasons for not doing so unless we really *need* to.
-1 (It is not a good indication)
I know Danny is stuck with JDK 1.3. :)
There's NIO, built in JNDI DNS library, TLS capabilities. What about
requirin
I think we'd need to poll our users explicitly first.
There are still good reasons for not doing so unless we really *need* to.
-1 (It is not a good indication)
d.
> Could it be an indicator that we can move on to requiring 1.4, that would
be
> nice.
>
> --Søren
+1 :-)
Vincenzo
---
> On Monday 14 June 2004 23:05, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
> > As you can probably tell, I just tweaked CVS to include the final release
> > versions of DBCP and Pool. The only change between what we have now and
> > what we used for testing is trivial removal (a few lines, which were
> > carefully ve
On Monday 14 June 2004 23:05, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
> As you can probably tell, I just tweaked CVS to include the final release
> versions of DBCP and Pool. The only change between what we have now and
> what we used for testing is trivial removal (a few lines, which were
> carefully vetted by ha
31 matches
Mail list logo
