Re: James Server as a WAR

2008-02-08 Thread Robert Burrell Donkin
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

[jira] Commented: (MIME4J-34) o.a.j.m.message.Header#writeTo violates RFC 822

2008-02-08 Thread Robert Burrell Donkin (JIRA)
[ 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

Re: James OSGi Bundle

2008-02-08 Thread Robert Burrell Donkin
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

Re: James Server as a WAR

2008-02-08 Thread Robert Burrell Donkin
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

Re: James Server as a WAR

2008-02-08 Thread Robert Burrell Donkin
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

[jira] Commented: (MIME4J-34) o.a.j.m.message.Header#writeTo violates RFC 822

2008-02-08 Thread Oleg Kalnichevski (JIRA)
[ 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

[jira] Updated: (MIME4J-34) o.a.j.m.message.Header#writeTo violates RFC 822

2008-02-08 Thread Oleg Kalnichevski (JIRA)
[ 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 >

[jira] Updated: (MIME4J-34) o.a.j.m.message.Header#writeTo violates RFC 822

2008-02-08 Thread Oleg Kalnichevski (JIRA)
[ 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 >

[jira] Updated: (MIME4J-34) o.a.j.m.message.Header#writeTo violates RFC 822

2008-02-08 Thread Oleg Kalnichevski (JIRA)
[ 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

Re: James Server as a WAR

2008-02-08 Thread Serge Knystautas
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

Re: James OSGi Bundle

2008-02-08 Thread Stefano Bagnara
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

[jira] Commented: (MIME4J-34) o.a.j.m.message.Header#writeTo violates RFC 822

2008-02-08 Thread Stefano Bagnara (JIRA)
[ 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

JAMES Server Nightly Build Report

2008-02-08 Thread JAMES Nightly Build System
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

Re: James Server as a WAR

2008-02-08 Thread Danny Angus
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

Re: James OSGi Bundle

2008-02-08 Thread Danny Angus
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

Re: James Server as a WAR

2008-02-08 Thread Jukka Zitting
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

Re: James Server as a WAR

2008-02-08 Thread Danny Angus
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"