Noel J. Bergman wrote: > I am thinking that we could have a JellyProcessor, e.g., > > <processor name="custom-stuff" > class="org.apache.james.transport.JellyProcessor"> > ... > </processor> > > allowing the script to handle its own matching and > functionality.
I'm not sure that we need to force Jelly, or any other scripting language to operate in a discrete processor. Doing so would mean that the processor could not invoke standard or scripted mailets and matchers without making special provision. Reuse would be lost. Keeping basically the same architecture as used in the current ScriptedMailet and ScriptedMatcher allows standard and scripted mailets and matchers to be used within a processor. As the language is declared for each scripted mailet and matcher, multiple languages can be used. If a script wants to implement its own matching and functionality, that's fine. If this is to be for an entire processor, that's fine too, just include a single ScriptedMailet in the processor. > When you > look at something like sieve, this also makes sense. ??? sieve ??? -- Steve - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This private and confidential e-mail has been sent to you by Synergy Systems Limited. It may not represent the views of Synergy Systems Limited. If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail and have received it in error, please notify the sender by replying with "received in error" as the subject and then delete it from your mailbox. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
