Stefano Bagnara wrote: > Norman Maurer wrote: > > Wel my idea why i want to move it into a subproject was > that maybe some > > developer whould find it very usefull to just use a framework for > > getting a bayesian filter integrate with their software. I > think most of > > developer don't need a full mailserver like james. Thats > only my point > > of view.. > > > > And still think that most work on the bayesian code should > be still done > > by Vinzenco and Danny cause both of them work on that code > and have the > > background knowing of the alcorithm etc.. I just whould > help to move it > > as the first step .. > > > > bye > > Norman > > We already have mime4j and jsieve that are almost > dead/unsupported. I'm > +0 in creating a new subproject, but I think that the +1 should come > from people that really will commit themselves to the > subproject lifecycle.
Just for info, I don't consider jsieve dead, just resting :) Its waiting for our infrastructure to evolve to plug it in - IMAP and the new extended Mailet API should do the job. I had hoped that we would get there (much) sooner. Its entirely independant of James but as a matter of loyalty I have always wanted to use James as the flagship integration. > Generally speaking I think that extracting utility libraries > from server > code is a good idea to increase our community. Agreed. As I've said before, a mail-commons is an excellent idea for reusable components with a clear and clean API which is James independent. I don't believe that the Bayesian stuff meets these criteria right now. If someone wishes to evolve it to do so, cool! Until then lets leave it where it is. <snipped/> Cheers -- Steve --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
