On Sun, Nov 2, 2008 at 9:11 PM, Bernd Fondermann
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 2, 2008 at 12:43, Stefano Bagnara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Robert Burrell Donkin ha scritto:
>>> i'm increasingly convinced that the 3.0 codebase contains some
>>> compelling reasons to upgrade. i think i
On Sun, Nov 2, 2008 at 12:43, Stefano Bagnara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Robert Burrell Donkin ha scritto:
>> i'm increasingly convinced that the 3.0 codebase contains some
>> compelling reasons to upgrade. i think it's important to offer an
>> upgrade path for existing installations including re
On Sun, Nov 2, 2008 at 12:33 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Author: rdonkin
> Date: Sun Nov 2 04:33:56 2008
> New Revision: 709875
>
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=709875&view=rev
> Log:
> Improved poms but don't seem to be able to make the build work correctly :-/
i'm having problems
Robert Burrell Donkin ha scritto:
> (as can be seen at
> http://james.apache.org/mailet/base/apidocs/index.html) base mailet
> has quite a lot of packages for such a small library. they also seem
> quite messy - and so unlikely to play well with OSGi (for example).
>
> perhaps we should take this
Author: rdonkin
Date: Sun Nov 2 04:33:56 2008
New Revision: 709875
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=709875&view=rev
Log:
Improved poms but don't seem to be able to make the build work correctly :-/
Modified:
james/protocols/imap/trunk/protocol-tester/pom.xml
james/protocols/imap/tru
Author: rdonkin
Date: Sun Nov 2 04:09:38 2008
New Revision: 709874
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=709874&view=rev
Log:
Prune duplicates. IMAP-65
Added:
james/protocols/imap/trunk/protocol-tester/src/main/java/org/apache/james/test/
james/protocols/imap/trunk/protocol-tester/src/
Robert Burrell Donkin ha scritto:
> i'm increasingly convinced that the 3.0 codebase contains some
> compelling reasons to upgrade. i think it's important to offer an
> upgrade path for existing installations including retaining 1.4 JVM
> support. this means preserving 1.4 compatibility in the API
Hi Robert,
I'm very limited in free time atm. So I think the descision should be made
by the active developers. Anyway I think we should drop java 1.4 support at
all. I see no real reason to support such old / outdated jvm.
Cheers,
Norman
2008/11/2 Robert Burrell Donkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> i
Factor out protocol testing framework
-
Key: IMAP-65
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IMAP-65
Project: JAMES Imap
Issue Type: Task
Components: Build System, SEDA Function
Affects Ve
Author: rdonkin
Date: Sun Nov 2 03:21:08 2008
New Revision: 709867
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=709867&view=rev
Log:
Copy module before pruning source not related to the protocol testing
framework. IMAP-65.
Added:
james/protocols/imap/trunk/protocol-tester/
- copied from r709
i'm increasingly convinced that the 3.0 codebase contains some
compelling reasons to upgrade. i think it's important to offer an
upgrade path for existing installations including retaining 1.4 JVM
support. this means preserving 1.4 compatibility in the API and
library layers and in any functions th
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:
-
On Sun, Nov 2, 2008 at 12:38 AM, David Jencks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Nov 1, 2008, at 1:38 PM, Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 6:56 AM, David Jencks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote:
>>> it seems to me that the main reason
>>> you'd be running james inside geronim
13 matches
Mail list logo
