[EMAIL PROTECTED] on 22 January 2008 23:47 wrote:
> To: James Developers List
> Subject: Re: [PLANNING] Road map - lets find some consensus on
> release contents
>
>
> > ATM JAMES allows developers to create third party plugins
> but does not
> > clearly indicate which APIs are subject
> ATM JAMES allows developers to create third party plugins but does not
> clearly indicate which APIs are subject to change
+1 API's need to be an early target.
d.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional comm
Robert Burrell Donkin wrote on: 22 January 2008 21:32
> On Jan 22, 2008 9:29 PM, Stefano Bagnara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Robert Burrell Donkin ha scritto:
> > >>> mime4j - completion of refactoring
> > >> I'm not sure how much energy this will take and how we
> should delay a
> > >> release
On Jan 22, 2008 9:09 PM, Stefano Bagnara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Robert Burrell Donkin ha scritto:
> > On Jan 22, 2008 6:39 PM, Stefano Bagnara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> Robert Burrell Donkin ha scritto:
> >>> it's a milestone rather than an alpha. we don't have alpha quality
> >>> code
On Jan 22, 2008 9:09 PM, Stefano Bagnara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Robert Burrell Donkin ha scritto:
> > On Jan 22, 2008 6:39 PM, Stefano Bagnara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > next-minor (2.4 ?): this is Noel field. My opinion is unchanged. IMHO we
> > should work on trunk because ba
On Jan 22, 2008 9:29 PM, Stefano Bagnara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Robert Burrell Donkin ha scritto:
> >>> mime4j - completion of refactoring
> >> I'm not sure how much energy this will take and how we should delay a
> >> release, but why don't we release 0.4 based on the current codebase and
>
Robert Burrell Donkin ha scritto:
mime4j - completion of refactoring
I'm not sure how much energy this will take and how we should delay a
release, but why don't we release 0.4 based on the current codebase and
then refactor more in 0.5 ?
We did this with jSPF and we made a lot of releases. I th
On Jan 22, 2008 9:09 PM, Stefano Bagnara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> jSieve: do we just need to package a release, review and vote on it (I
> don't see open JIRA issues for 0.2)? I think we already discussed the
> possibility to release it on 24/10/2007 and everyone agreed we were
> ready. I ca
Robert Burrell Donkin ha scritto:
On Jan 22, 2008 6:39 PM, Stefano Bagnara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Robert Burrell Donkin ha scritto:
it's a milestone rather than an alpha. we don't have alpha quality
code that we intend to fix up and release but a mixed bag which we
cannot promise will be co
Hi all,
sorry im quite busy at the moment with some migrations.. So I will try
to respond to all mails later.. Some comments are inline..
Am Dienstag, den 22.01.2008, 19:39 +0100 schrieb Stefano Bagnara:
> Robert Burrell Donkin ha scritto:
> > it's a milestone rather than an alpha. we don't have
On Jan 22, 2008 7:18 PM, Stefano Bagnara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Robert Burrell Donkin ha scritto:
> > On Jan 16, 2008 9:10 PM, Stefano Bagnara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >> Mine was a really concrete, alternative, proposal: merge the 2 modules
> >
> > if you spelled it out like
On Jan 22, 2008 6:39 PM, Stefano Bagnara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Robert Burrell Donkin ha scritto:
> > it's a milestone rather than an alpha. we don't have alpha quality
> > code that we intend to fix up and release but a mixed bag which we
> > cannot promise will be compatible with an eventua
Robert Burrell Donkin ha scritto:
On Jan 16, 2008 9:10 PM, Stefano Bagnara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Mine was a really concrete, alternative, proposal: merge the 2 modules
if you spelled it out like that before, then my apologies (i must have
missed it)
Well, the subject of the thread an
On Jan 16, 2008 9:10 PM, Stefano Bagnara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Mine was a really concrete, alternative, proposal: merge the 2 modules
if you spelled it out like that before, then my apologies (i must have
missed it)
combining the basic and avalon means that the only user implementation
Robert Burrell Donkin ha scritto:
it's a milestone rather than an alpha. we don't have alpha quality
code that we intend to fix up and release but a mixed bag which we
cannot promise will be compatible with an eventual 3.0 release
I agree. And if we don't plan to include IMAP then probably "2.5
On Jan 21, 2008 11:49 PM, Danny Angus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So we're looking for a plan to sort out trunk, with realistic milestones then?
sorting out trunk would take a lot of energy but may not be necessary
if we branch then prune
(i have some more comments related to this but i'll add t
Hi,
the spring-deployment is fixed and the next nightly should be working again.
Bernd
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Author: berndf
Date: Tue Jan 22 03:01:29 2008
New Revision: 614172
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=614172&view=rev
Log:
spring-deployment: also aquire james-server-${version}.jar from
phoenix-deployment
Modified:
james/server/trunk/spring-deployment/build.xml
Modified: james/server/tr
Author: berndf
Date: Tue Jan 22 02:42:22 2008
New Revision: 614166
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=614166&view=rev
Log:
adopt latest configs from phoenix-deployment/src/conf/
Modified:
james/server/trunk/spring-deployment/src/main/config/james-assembly.xml
james/server/trunk/spring-
An automated nightly build of JAMES has been posted to
http://people.apache.org/builds/james/nightly/
Any unit test errors from the build should be reported below:
-
20 matches
Mail list logo
