Danny Angus ha scritto:
On 8/16/07, Norman Maurer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Stefano Bagnara schrieb:
I fully agree with Stefano,
!!
What is your point? That the API should enforce RFC compliance and not
the server?
Why? The servlet API doesn't enforce compliance with http or html
On 8/16/07, Stefano Bagnara [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
IMHO it is not true that we can leave the checks to the container:
sometimes Mailets do write new addresses. In this case we would have
mailet author to write their own implementation
No.
or depend on some
specific container (using the
On 8/16/07, Danny Angus [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
server authors can choose whether to change
their implementation to validate against more/other specifications or
to remain strictly compliant with the original specification.
And users can choose to use a competing product.
d.
Danny Angus ha scritto:
On 8/16/07, Stefano Bagnara [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
IMHO it is not true that we can leave the checks to the container:
sometimes Mailets do write new addresses. In this case we would have
mailet author to write their own implementation
No.
or depend on some
On 8/15/07, Danny Angus [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think that I agree with roberts issue regarding MailAddress (MAILET-9)
I would like to propose that the API specify an interface and possibly
an InternetAddress wrapper if we produce an RI. but that in general
the container should be concerned
i've revised the MailAdapter API so that the responsibility for
parsing the addresses is push to the adapter. however, Envelope
extends Address.
i wondered whether this the API needs altering so that getEnvelopes
returns addresses but i'm struggling to understand the envelope test
in
Robert Burrell Donkin ha scritto:
i've revised the MailAdapter API so that the responsibility for
parsing the addresses is push to the adapter. however, Envelope
extends Address.
i wondered whether this the API needs altering so that getEnvelopes
returns addresses but i'm struggling to
Hi all,
are there any plans to implement the Imap Idle command?
i will need it to a project that i'm developing, so if there are no plans to
develop it,
i will work on it myself. but i might need some help.
what would be the right approach to do it?
i probably should add imap idle to the command
On 8/16/07, Paulo Sergio [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi all,
hi paulo
are there any plans to implement the Imap Idle command?
no immediate ones ;-)
i will need it to a project that i'm developing, so if there are no plans to
develop it,
i will work on it myself.
glad to have a volunteer :-)
On 8/16/07, Danny Angus [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 8/16/07, Norman Maurer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Stefano Bagnara schrieb:
I fully agree with Stefano,
!!
What is your point? That the API should enforce RFC compliance and not
the server?
Why? The servlet API doesn't enforce compliance
Hi Robert,
On 8/16/07, Robert Burrell Donkin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 8/16/07, Paulo Sergio [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi all,
hi paulo
are there any plans to implement the Imap Idle command?
no immediate ones ;-)
i will need it to a project that i'm developing, so if there are no
Robert Burrell Donkin ha scritto:
On 8/16/07, Danny Angus [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 8/16/07, Norman Maurer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Stefano Bagnara schrieb:
I fully agree with Stefano,
!!
What is your point? That the API should enforce RFC compliance and not
the server?
Why? The servlet
12 matches
Mail list logo
