To whom it may engage...
This is an automated request, but not an unsolicited one. For
more information please visit http://gump.apache.org/nagged.html,
and/or contact the folk at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Project james-server has an issue affecting its community integration.
This issue affects
On Nov 10, 2008, at 1:23 PM, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
Norman Maurer asked:
Why we would need java 6 ? Which feature you miss in java 5 ?
JSR-223, for one. Yes, we could backport using BSF, but deployment
would be
easier if we went with Java 6.
Also, "little features include SSLParameters
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MIME4J-84?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12646390#action_12646390
]
Markus Wiederkehr commented on MIME4J-84:
-
Oleg, please remove Base64OutputStream li
On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 9:23 PM, Noel J. Bergman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Norman Maurer asked:
>> What's wrong with spring ?
>
> Non-standard and unnecessary. OSGi is the standard.
OSGi is fine for containing coursely grained services but avoiding
spring for configuration and assembly of t
To whom it may engage...
This is an automated request, but not an unsolicited one. For
more information please visit http://gump.apache.org/nagged.html,
and/or contact the folk at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Project james-server has an issue affecting its community integration.
This issue affects
Norman Maurer asked:
> Why we would need java 6 ? Which feature you miss in java 5 ?
JSR-223, for one. Yes, we could backport using BSF, but deployment would be
easier if we went with Java 6.
Also, "little features include SSLParameters class that encapsulates the
configuration of SSL connectio
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MIME4J-84?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Oleg Kalnichevski resolved MIME4J-84.
-
Resolution: Fixed
Patch checked in. Many thanks, Markus, for contributing it.
Oleg
> Ba
Author: olegk
Date: Mon Nov 10 12:44:00 2008
New Revision: 712828
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=712828&view=rev
Log:
MIME4J-84: Base64OutputStream and trailing CRLFs
Contributed by Markus Wiederkehr
Modified:
james/mime4j/trunk/src/main/java/org/apache/james/mime4j/decoder/Base64O
On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 8:05 PM, Stefano Bagnara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Noel J. Bergman ha scritto:
>>> i quite fancy experimenting with some stuff (for example OpenJPA) that
>>> requires java 5.
>>
>> I want to see annotations, myself. And favor a move to Java 6, as long as
>> we are making
Noel J. Bergman ha scritto:
>> i quite fancy experimenting with some stuff (for example OpenJPA) that
>> requires java 5.
>
> I want to see annotations, myself. And favor a move to Java 6, as long as
> we are making the big switch.
>
>> following long term strategy: we use the same module system
On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 21:01, Robert Burrell Donkin
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 7:54 PM, Norman Maurer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> 2008/11/10 Noel J. Bergman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>>> > following long term strategy: we use the same module system but ship
>>> > the phoeni
On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 19:58, Noel J. Bergman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> i quite fancy experimenting with some stuff (for example OpenJPA) that
>> requires java 5.
>
> I want to see annotations, myself. And favor a move to Java 6, as long as
> we are making the big switch.
-1 to Java6 ATM. It
On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 7:54 PM, Norman Maurer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 2008/11/10 Noel J. Bergman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> > following long term strategy: we use the same module system but ship
>> > the phoenix built under 1.4 (without new features) and spring built
>> > under 1.5 (with the new
2008/11/10 Noel J. Bergman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > i quite fancy experimenting with some stuff (for example OpenJPA) that
> > requires java 5.
>
> I want to see annotations, myself. And favor a move to Java 6, as long as
> we are making the big switch.
Why we would need java 6 ? Which feature y
On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 6:58 PM, Noel J. Bergman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> following long term strategy: we use the same module system but ship
>> the phoenix built under 1.4 (without new features) and spring built
>> under 1.5 (with the new features).
>
> -1 to Spring. +1 for OSGi.
i don'
> i quite fancy experimenting with some stuff (for example OpenJPA) that
> requires java 5.
I want to see annotations, myself. And favor a move to Java 6, as long as
we are making the big switch.
> following long term strategy: we use the same module system but ship
> the phoenix built under 1.4
To whom it may engage...
This is an automated request, but not an unsolicited one. For
more information please visit http://gump.apache.org/nagged.html,
and/or contact the folk at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Project james-jsieve has an issue affecting its community integration.
This issue affects
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:
-
18 matches
Mail list logo
