On Feb 9, 2008 7:09 AM, Robert Burrell Donkin
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Feb 8, 2008 3:20 PM, Serge Knystautas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Feb 8, 2008 3:17 AM, Danny Angus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > On Feb 7, 2008 12:14 AM, Noel J. Bergman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > T
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MIME4J-34?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12567285#action_12567285
]
Robert Burrell Donkin commented on MIME4J-34:
-
Oleg - RFC2047 defines a custom c
On Feb 8, 2008 10:33 AM, Stefano Bagnara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Danny Angus ha scritto:
> > On Feb 5, 2008 3:09 PM, Stefano Bagnara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >> I'm not sure I understand the advantages of the redeploy of a single
> >> processor.
> >
> > Processors are bigger than colle
On Feb 8, 2008 3:20 PM, Serge Knystautas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Feb 8, 2008 3:17 AM, Danny Angus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Feb 7, 2008 12:14 AM, Noel J. Bergman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > That's generally down to laziness, not good architecture.
> >
> > I don't think its
On 2/8/08, Danny Angus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Feb 8, 2008 8:27 AM, Jukka Zitting <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > From my perspective and use cases I mostly care about James being
> > modular and easily embeddable.
+1
> You're not the only one, there are many many use-cases that see Jam
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MIME4J-34?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12567075#action_12567075
]
Oleg Kalnichevski commented on MIME4J-34:
-
> The strictly correct approach would be
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MIME4J-34?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Oleg Kalnichevski updated MIME4J-34:
Attachment: (was: mimeheader.patch)
> o.a.j.m.message.Header#writeTo violates RFC 822
>
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MIME4J-34?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Oleg Kalnichevski updated MIME4J-34:
Attachment: (was: mimeheader.patch)
> o.a.j.m.message.Header#writeTo violates RFC 822
>
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MIME4J-34?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Oleg Kalnichevski updated MIME4J-34:
Attachment: mimeheader.patch
The new version of the patch adds support for different protoco
On Feb 8, 2008 3:17 AM, Danny Angus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Feb 7, 2008 12:14 AM, Noel J. Bergman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > That's generally down to laziness, not good architecture.
>
> I don't think its fair to characterize the perfectly reasonable desire
> to minimise the admin ov
Danny Angus ha scritto:
On Feb 5, 2008 3:09 PM, Stefano Bagnara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'm not sure I understand the advantages of the redeploy of a single
processor.
Processors are bigger than collections of mailet/matchers, they can
invoke one another and can be implemented in differen
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MIME4J-34?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12566974#action_12566974
]
Stefano Bagnara commented on MIME4J-34:
---
Ok, I know you probably don't want to add jav
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:
grep: /home/noel/ASF/james/server/trunk/dist/*/downloads/BUILD.lo
On Feb 8, 2008 8:27 AM, Jukka Zitting <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> From my perspective and use cases I mostly care about James being
> modular and easily embeddable.
You're not the only one, there are many many use-cases that see James
embedded to provide the embedor with high quality adaptable m
On Feb 5, 2008 3:09 PM, Stefano Bagnara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm not sure I understand the advantages of the redeploy of a single
> processor.
Processors are bigger than collections of mailet/matchers, they can
invoke one another and can be implemented in different ways, e.g.
jsieve.
Th
Hi,
On Feb 3, 2008 11:51 AM, Bernd Fondermann
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Triggered by recent posts by Jukka and others, I am starting to work
> on a spring-deployment based web archive (WAR) deployment.
> [...]
> What do others think?
>From my perspective and use cases I mostly care about James
On Feb 7, 2008 12:14 AM, Noel J. Bergman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> That's generally down to laziness, not good architecture.
I don't think its fair to characterize the perfectly reasonable desire
to minimise the admin overhead of systems, and the size of the skills
base required as "laziness"
17 matches
Mail list logo