On Sun, Nov 29, 2009 at 6:15 PM, Norman Maurer <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi all, > > I'm currently looking at JAMES and see what todo before cut the first > Milestone of JAMES 3.0. One of the things beside of remove Avalon > completly is the storing of messages. I don't like to much to have > different "stores" for IMAP and POP3. I would like to have only one > Store for both ( When switching from IMAP to POP3, only the INBOX > would be visible etc), so I wonder if we should remove the > MailRepository completly and use MailboxManager ( it would need some > hacking for POP3 maybe ) for all. > > WDYT ?
IMAP is quite a different protocol and IMO it's a mistake to try to force POP3 and IMAP into a single expressive interface. i would prefer just an outlet style interface and rely on attributes for folders etc. this would allow other outlets (eg JMS) to be unified. i think something as simple void deliver(Mail mail, String url) [url might be 'imap://r...@localhost' or 'james://r...@localhost' or 'mysql://r...@localhost:5781] opens a lot of interesting possibilities then the folder stuff in Sieve etc could be handled as mail attributes. so, the Sieve script would set 'org.apache.james.FOLDER' or 'org.apache.james.TAG' to be 'cool/james' which local (or remote ;-) IMAP adapters would then interpret as directories whereas POP3 would ignore. might even be able to lose the url by relying on an attribute eg 'org.apache.james.DELIVERY_URL' then we'd have void out(Mail mail) simple but powerful this might allow us to take another look at mail pipelining in terms of void in(Mail mail) and void out(Mail mail) interfaces - robert --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
