On 3/13/07, Andrew C. Oliver <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Danny Angus wrote: > On 3/13/07, robert burrell donkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> reinforces my view that JAMES should only parse data into a JavaMail >> message when this is demanded by a processor > > Totally. > > and we do need to write our own implementation rather than use the > com.sun stuff which isn't really suited to throughput, and lacks some > features which could be of use. The Geronimo boys started that but aborted, but do you think it would be wiser to start from scratch rather than fix Sun's at least as a starting point? Assuming that the performance issues in Mime4J are resolved it could take the place of the JAF + mime content type handlers (refactoring them as needed). Assuming they're willing to collaborate then perhaps a perf branch that fixes the problems of the assumptions in the spec could help affect the next edition.
i suppose this depends on their attribute to collaboration. anyone have any contacts? - robert --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
