Danny Angus wrote:

> Lots!

Danny,

I agree that where we are simply introducing support for expressing
conditional logic and evaluation in a scripted language, that this is best
done within the current Mailet container, so as to continue leveraging the
existing declarative mail flow.

I don't see the advantage of creating a new container just to get the
language support for matchers, which seems to be part of what you are
suggesting, if I understand you correctly.

An alternative approach is used in the currently submitted ScriptedMatcher
and ScriptedMailet, which support any BSF language. The particular language
used by each Matcher and Mailet is specified in the 'language=' tag of its
declaration. Thus, in one processor, multiple languages can be 'mixed and
matched'.

We could subclass to avoid the 'language=' tag and have 'JavaScriptMatcher',
'JPythonMailet', etc.

A new container makes sense for something like Sieve, which implements its
own mail flow. It has no need of, and it would be difficult to inter-operate
with, individual Mailets. So, there is no point it carrying the overhead. A
Sieve container would be James aware and we would declare Tests (like
Matchers) and Commands (like Mailets) to Sieve which under the covers may
exploit James facilities to do their work. Administrator written Sieve code
would use these blissfully unware that it was running in James and the
developer of this code would only have to understand the Sieve process flow,
not that of James.

Cheers,

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]

Reply via email to