Bernd Fondermann ha scritto:
> On 10/8/07, Noel J. Bergman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I will go on record that I oppose a move to Spring, and have said so on
>> multiple occassions.  However, I do not oppose optional support for Spring.
> 
> The Phoenix deployment will live on. All the users having their own
> components and whatever customizations will be supported. For new
> users starting to use James there is no fundamental advantage chosing
> one deployment over the other. Except if they already have Spring
> components (or POJOs) they'd like to integrate with.

It will take a bit for spring to catch up with all the features our user
may currently use in our phoenix deployment.

The spring deploymnet will need the scripts for unix and windows, the
wrappers to run it as a service, it will need the integration with
Commons Daemon.

As an example of phoenix advanced components, phoenix provides a
Beanshell based kernel that you can access with a console to manage the
container and the contained applications dynamically.

Phoenix has an HTTP adaptor on the ServiceManager that allow you to
access the JMX services via web.

Phoenix supports classloader isolations between multiple applications
deployed inside it

Not everything in this list will make me veto a proposal to use spring
as our main deployment and forget about phoenix, but some of them are
important, and this was mainly to make it clear that spring is not the
panacea.

On the container side I keep monitoring the directory project, because I
think ApacheDS and JAMES Server could share a lot, and "following" a
more active project could help us in working on our real goals: the mail
handling. OT: In almost an year we didn't add anything SMTP/POP3 related
neither improved our support for mailets (this is not a critic to you or
your cool spring module, but something our PMC should take into account)

Stefano


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to