On Dec 3, 2007 4:04 PM, Noel J. Bergman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Danny Angus wrote: > > > I agree, but the message body should be a serialised Mail and not a > > Message to keep things simple.
it's not necessary to specify the message format. it's sufficient that the implementor of the MailBuilder used understands how to decode the message and create the required Mail. but yes, Mail object message sounds like a standard implementation JAMES might ship with > I don't know that the message needs to be a serialized Mail as opposed to > some other text format, to make things easier (a goal of Robert's) -- the key > is that we need the envelope information. As a concrete example, without an > envelope, you cannot perform a blindcopy. yes the implementor of the MailBuilder interface should be responsible for supplying this envelope from the message. that's the long and the short of it. there's a toy implementation in there which is probably good enough for ASCII mail generated programmatically but i suspect that most users will have to write a custom MailBuilder > And, to be clear, the use of JMES should be limited to injecting mail into > JAMES, or posting via a Mailet to an external queue, but not used as (quoting > Tim Stephenson): "a means to inject Mail into James' processors." i suspect that this is just a matter of terminology. it injects Mail into the spool for processing. > The processors are managed by the spooler, and JMS doesn't support the > dynamic selection we need, internally, for the spooler. (i'm not sure that this is correct but this isn't my target use case so i won't waste time arguing - the proof's would be in the coding...) - robert --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
