robert burrell donkin wrote: > > > On 2/15/07, David Woldrich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Robert, > > > > Ok, fair enough. Well, honestly for starters, I would love > to deploy > > James as a monolithic Enterprise App or Web App if we could > work out the > > lifecycle issues (meaning System.exit() isn't the only way > to achieve > > orderly server shutdown.) It's been awhile since I looked > deep enough > > at that code to say whether that problem has already been solved or > > not. So, if I could get that, it would totally solve my short term > > itch. If you think that that's a rabbit hole not worth > diving into, I > > will trust your judgement. But, if it is, I'd like to > tackle that first > > and get it overwith. > > i really think that the best approach would be to deploy JAMES as a > service available to enterprise applications rather than as an > enterprise application. so, i prefer the idea of deployment as a > plugin but i'm not a geronimo guru. i think that the first step should > be to ask the geronimo team whether this would be the best approach. > this probably means posting something appropriate to the dev list. > > for connectivity to the JAMES service, this is where i think that > service bus and JCA ideas are powerful. rather than thinking about an > EJB, multiple transport mechanisms would be powerful: EJB, WS, JMS, > JCA and so on. adopting a bus might give a lot of benefits for very > little effort. > > - robert
I agree "that the best approach would be to deploy JAMES as a service available to enterprise applications", particularly connected via a JCA. This would allow James to be connected to any modern J2EE server or a JCA aware service bus. In contrast, a Geronimo plug-in would only be useful within Geronimo. The JCA approach is also a more realistic goal as it would entail much less work! I'd guess the next step would be to identify what could usefully be exposed as James services. Top of my list would be injecting mail into the spool, reading mail from the mail stores and exposing dynamically configurable artifacts. Regarding multiple transport mechanisms, with a configured James JCA in a J2EE server, such as Geronimo, we should delegate exposing these to the server. They have far better support for these than we could ever hope to achieve by duplicating them. Again, it would entail much less work! Cheers Steve --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
