On 1/7/07, Stefano Bagnara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
3 full weeks passed, and this is an update of this running vote.
Stefano Bagnara wrote:
> 1) Backport the custom static access to DNSServer.
> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=rev&revision=470929
-1 Stefano (binding)
-0 Norman (binding)
-0
(with danny's permission, moving this back on list after accidental
personal communication)
On 1/8/07, robert burrell donkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 1/8/07, Danny Angus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 1/7/07, robert burrell donkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > advanced email servers end
robert burrell donkin wrote:
my work on the OpenPGP/SMIME implementation has stalled and i'm not
sure when i'll be able to find the three or fours dedicated days i
need to finish it off. i was wondering whether it would be a good idea
for me to take a branch so that the code is in version control
On 1/8/07, Joachim Draeger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Am Freitag, den 05.01.2007, 19:56 +0100 schrieb Joachim Draeger:
> Am Freitag, den 05.01.2007, 09:19 + schrieb Danny Angus:
>
> > > The best way would be a native, logical, hierarchical mailbox access
> > > through the Mailet API.
> >
> >
+1
On 1/8/07, robert burrell donkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
my work on the OpenPGP/SMIME implementation has stalled and i'm not
sure when i'll be able to find the three or fours dedicated days i
need to finish it off. i was wondering whether it would be a good idea
for me to take a branch so
Just go ahead and create a sandbox.. Even if it will get out of sync
soon with current trunk .
bye
Norman
robert burrell donkin schrieb:
> my work on the OpenPGP/SMIME implementation has stalled and i'm not
> sure when i'll be able to find the three or fours dedicated days i
> need to finish it o
On 1/8/07, Danny Angus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
A discussion on the Mailet-api list about annotations has started to
look at the possibility of requiring java 5 for James.
+1
--
Serge Knystautas
Lokitech >> software . strategy . design >> http://www.lokitech.com
p. 301.656.5501
e. [EMAIL PRO
my work on the OpenPGP/SMIME implementation has stalled and i'm not
sure when i'll be able to find the three or fours dedicated days i
need to finish it off. i was wondering whether it would be a good idea
for me to take a branch so that the code is in version control (rather
than on my hard disc)
Joachim Draeger wrote:
> Am Montag, den 08.01.2007, 17:31 +0100 schrieb Stefano Bagnara:
> > Joachim Draeger wrote:
>
> > > I have the idea of a repository that simply deals with
> streams. That way
> > > everything could be easily stored. Text (like a script),
> XML, serialized
> > > objects, pro
Am Montag, den 08.01.2007, 17:31 +0100 schrieb Stefano Bagnara:
> Joachim Draeger wrote:
> > I have the idea of a repository that simply deals with streams. That way
> > everything could be easily stored. Text (like a script), XML, serialized
> > objects, property files.
> >
> I think that crea
+1
On 1/8/07, Danny Angus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi,
I'm calling this vote here and not on general@ because it affects James server.
Because of interest in advancing the Mailet API and opinions already
expressed in this thread
(http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/james-general/200610.m
A happy +0 to all - since I currently don't have the time to go
through the issues one-by-one :-(
But I will be able to run tests on a build.
Bernd
On 1/8/07, Norman Maurer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi Guys,
i finished the copy and merge of the 2.3.1 branch. I updated the headers
too. Now th
Author: danny
Date: Mon Jan 8 09:08:14 2007
New Revision: 494122
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=rev&rev=494122
Log:
1st experiment/sample using annotations for DI into mailets, injects "maildb"
datasource into ToRepository
Added:
james/server/sandbox/mailet-refactorings/src/java/o
Joachim Draeger wrote:
Yet another proposal, go James go! ;-)
Discussing jSieve usage, the question came up where to put the scripts.
There are number of possibilities... File, DB, LDAP etc, etc.
At the moment every Mailet that should work on a per user basis has to
implement it's own backend.
Hi!
Yet another proposal, go James go! ;-)
Discussing jSieve usage, the question came up where to put the scripts.
There are number of possibilities... File, DB, LDAP etc, etc.
At the moment every Mailet that should work on a per user basis has to
implement it's own backend. (e.g. JDBC)
I hav
Author: norman
Date: Mon Jan 8 07:04:08 2007
New Revision: 494089
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=rev&rev=494089
Log:
Fix version number
Modified:
james/server/branches/v2.3/default.properties
Modified: james/server/branches/v2.3/default.properties
URL:
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/
On 1/8/07, Joachim Draeger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
What you are probably interested in is an example for the use case
"MailboxManager usage inside a Mailet". This can also be done in trunk.
Yes correct. :-)
-
To unsubscrib
Am Freitag, den 05.01.2007, 19:56 +0100 schrieb Joachim Draeger:
> Am Freitag, den 05.01.2007, 09:19 + schrieb Danny Angus:
>
> > > The best way would be a native, logical, hierarchical mailbox access
> > > through the Mailet API.
> >
> > If you would like to expand on this idea I'd be intere
Stefano Bagnara schrieb:
> I use -0.9 instead of -1 because I don't want them to be considered
> vetoes even if I don't think it is a good idea to backport them.
>
> Norman Maurer wrote:
>> Hi Guys,
>>
>> i finished the copy and merge of the 2.3.1 branch. I updated the headers
>> too. Now there are
Am Montag, den 08.01.2007, 09:58 + schrieb Danny Angus:
> I would like to propose that the Mailet API be migrated into a new
> sub-project with all its mail on [EMAIL PROTECTED] and its svn in
> james/mailetapi
+1 (non binding)
I think it is important to show the public that james community
Evert Tigchelaar wrote:
Hi,
I created some mailets. One moves the body of the message to an
attachment and the other moves the text from an attachment to the
body. This can be usefull if an application that receives and send
e-mails that cannot handle attachments.
Evert
Cool! Please create
I use -0.9 instead of -1 because I don't want them to be considered
vetoes even if I don't think it is a good idea to backport them.
Norman Maurer wrote:
Hi Guys,
i finished the copy and merge of the 2.3.1 branch. I updated the headers
too. Now there are some issues I whould like to backport t
Hi,
I created some mailets. One moves the body of the message to an
attachment and the other moves the text from an attachment to the
body. This can be usefull if an application that receives and send
e-mails that cannot handle attachments.
Evert
--
Hi Guys,
i finished the copy and merge of the 2.3.1 branch. I updated the headers
too. Now there are some issues I whould like to backport to 2.3.1.. So
please review and give me some input ;-)
JAMES-715: RemoteDelivery act invalid domains as temporary failure
JAMES-721: MBoxMailRepository.remov
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JAMES-756?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Norman Maurer resolved JAMES-756.
-
Resolution: Fixed
Fix Version/s: (was: 2.3.1-dev)
Next Major
Change
Author: norman
Date: Mon Jan 8 05:25:40 2007
New Revision: 494062
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=rev&rev=494062
Log:
Fix typo in RemoteManager. Thx Kev Jackson for submitting the patch. See
JAMES-756
Modified:
james/server/trunk/src/java/org/apache/james/remotemanager/RemoteManager
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JAMES-677?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12463031
]
Norman Maurer commented on JAMES-677:
-
Done in 2.3 branch...
> Update license headers to follow the latest ASF re
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JAMES-718?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Norman Maurer resolved JAMES-718.
-
Resolution: Fixed
> Add warning to config.xml to explain the problems which can happen with
> mat
Author: norman
Date: Mon Jan 8 05:18:22 2007
New Revision: 494058
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=rev&rev=494058
Log:
Merge fixes for JAMES-718 (Mark Quota support as experimental)
Modified:
james/server/branches/v2.3/src/conf/james-config.xml
james/server/branches/v2.3/src/java/
Author: norman
Date: Mon Jan 8 05:15:03 2007
New Revision: 494056
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=rev&rev=494056
Log:
Merge fix for JAMES-735
Modified:
james/server/branches/v2.3/src/conf/james-config.xml
james/server/branches/v2.3/src/java/org/apache/james/transport/mailets/Remo
Added: james/server/branches/v2.3/src/site/xdoc/using_database.xml
URL:
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/james/server/branches/v2.3/src/site/xdoc/using_database.xml?view=auto&rev=494041
==
--- james/server/branches/v2.3/src/si
On 1/8/07, Stefano Bagnara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Does anyone know how many users was on Jdk 1.3 for outdated j2ee servers
1 year after java 5 has been released?
We were. I don't know of others.
d.
-
To unsubscribe, e-ma
On 1/8/07, Stefano Bagnara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Do you propose to create a new JIRA project, too?
Oh yeah, makes sense to I think.
We could even make a standalone release from that release (so current
projects using mailet apis can already use that) and add it as a
dependency in james
Author: norman
Date: Mon Jan 8 04:08:06 2007
New Revision: 494038
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=rev&rev=494038
Log:
Remove for copy from next-minor branch
Removed:
james/server/branches/v2.3/src/site/xdoc/changelog.xml
james/server/branches/v2.3/src/site/xdoc/index.xml
james
On 1/8/07, Stefano Bagnara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Bernd Fondermann wrote:
> We should continue to make sure James is running with Java versions > 1.4
> And I am +1 for a future version of the mailet engine to require Java 5.
> About requiring Java 5 for the Server, I don't know. Why should th
Bernd Fondermann wrote:
We should continue to make sure James is running with Java versions > 1.4
And I am +1 for a future version of the mailet engine to require Java 5.
About requiring Java 5 for the Server, I don't know. Why should the
Server require Java 5 if it really does not use any J5 spe
We should continue to make sure James is running with Java versions > 1.4
And I am +1 for a future version of the mailet engine to require Java 5.
About requiring Java 5 for the Server, I don't know. Why should the
Server require Java 5 if it really does not use any J5 specifics and
only one of it
Modified:
james/server/branches/v2.3/src/test/org/apache/james/util/ExtraDotOutputStreamTest.java
URL:
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/james/server/branches/v2.3/src/test/org/apache/james/util/ExtraDotOutputStreamTest.java?view=diff&rev=494012&r1=494011&r2=494012
+1
Norman
Danny Angus schrieb:
> Hi,
> I'm calling this vote here and not on general@ because it affects
> James server.
>
> Because of interest in advancing the Mailet API and opinions already
> expressed in this thread
> (http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/james-general/200610.mbox/[EMAIL
+1
As soon as we drop backward compatiblity.
bye
Norman
Danny Angus schrieb:
> A discussion on the Mailet-api list about annotations has started to
> look at the possibility of requiring java 5 for James.
>
> WDYT?
>
> I would be cautiously in favour of this as long as no-one knows of any
> real
On 1/8/07, Danny Angus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi,
I'm calling this vote here and not on general@ because it affects James server.
Because of interest in advancing the Mailet API and opinions already
expressed in this thread
(http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/james-general/200610.mbox/
+1 Stefano
PS: see the inline note.
Danny Angus wrote:
Hi,
I'm calling this vote here and not on general@ because it affects James
server.
Because of interest in advancing the Mailet API and opinions already
expressed in this thread
(http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/james-general/200
Danny Angus wrote:
A discussion on the Mailet-api list about annotations has started to
look at the possibility of requiring java 5 for James.
WDYT?
I would be cautiously in favour of this as long as no-one knows of any
real situations where 1.4 is the newest available version.
depending on wh
typos spelling / grammar error in doHELP command
Key: JAMES-756
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JAMES-756
Project: James
Issue Type: Improvement
Components: Remote Manager
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JAMES-756?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Kev Jackson updated JAMES-756:
--
Attachment: RemoteManagerHandler.java.patch
> typos spelling / grammar error in doHELP command
> ---
Author: danny
Date: Mon Jan 8 01:59:34 2007
New Revision: 494006
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=rev&rev=494006
Log:
vote - mailetapi as subproject
proposal - james to require jdk 1.5
Modified:
james/server/trunk/STATUS
Modified: james/server/trunk/STATUS
URL:
http://svn.apache.org/
Hi,
I'm calling this vote here and not on general@ because it affects James server.
Because of interest in advancing the Mailet API and opinions already
expressed in this thread
(http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/james-general/200610.mbox/[EMAIL
PROTECTED])
I would like to propose that t
Author: norman
Date: Mon Jan 8 01:46:13 2007
New Revision: 494002
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=rev&rev=494002
Log:
Rename previous copied branch
Added:
james/server/branches/v2.3/
- copied from r494001, james/server/branches/build_2_3_0/
Removed:
james/server/branches/bui
A discussion on the Mailet-api list about annotations has started to
look at the possibility of requiring java 5 for James.
WDYT?
I would be cautiously in favour of this as long as no-one knows of any
real situations where 1.4 is the newest available version.
depending on whether this proposal
Author: norman
Date: Mon Jan 8 01:44:59 2007
New Revision: 494001
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=rev&rev=494001
Log:
Copy 2_3_0 tag for using as 2.3 branch
Added:
james/server/branches/build_2_3_0/
- copied from r494000, james/server/tags/build_2_3_0/
Author: norman
Date: Mon Jan 8 01:43:28 2007
New Revision: 493999
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=rev&rev=493999
Log:
Rename v2.3 branch to next-minor
Added:
james/server/branches/next-minor/
- copied from r493998, james/server/branches/v2.3/
Removed:
james/server/branches/v
Norman Maurer wrote:
Mornin,
first i like the diff. But is there still any need for the println() ?
Can i remove it ?
Sorry, I forgot some trash around.
Please remove them when you find them.
Stefano
bye
Norman
[EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb:
Author: bago
Date: Sun Jan 7 15:27:45 2007
New Re
Norman Maurer wrote:
So i think i will "move" the current 2.3 branch to next-minor branch and start
a new 2.3 branch from 2_3_0 tag.
Please take care to not loose (re-apply/merge) my commits r469117 and
r475204.
They are website/documentation fixes already deployed.
Stefano
-
Thx Danny :-)
I will create/rename the branch etc soon.
bye
Norman
Danny Angus schrieb:
> Norman,
> I've updated the status file with the numbers of the binding votes, so
> that it is clear what was decided.
>
> On 1/8/07, Norman Maurer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Mornin,
>> I think its time t
Norman,
I've updated the status file with the numbers of the binding votes, so
that it is clear what was decided.
On 1/8/07, Norman Maurer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Mornin,
I think its time to close the VOTE as i started it at 18.12.06. So here we go..
1) Commit fixes and new "minor" features
Author: danny
Date: Mon Jan 8 01:09:35 2007
New Revision: 493995
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=rev&rev=493995
Log:
updated "[VOTE] Using of 2.3 branch" with summary of binding votes
Modified:
james/server/trunk/STATUS
Modified: james/server/trunk/STATUS
URL:
http://svn.apache.org/
56 matches
Mail list logo
