Trying with a different mail server, it consistently deletes with IMAP
and consistently fails to delete with POP3. Long as it's consistent,
I'm good. Thanks.
A couple issues that came up...
- I got a FolderNotOpen error when the component was trying to set the
DELETED flag. So to the beginning of MailConsumer.processCommit, in
the try block, I added:
Folder folder=mail.getFolder();
if (!folder.isOpen())
folder.open(Folder.READ_WRITE);
- For whatever reason there are mail servers that demand the whole
email address as the login ID. java.net.URI is incapable of handling
things like
imap://b...@dummy.com@dummy.com?password=test
imap://dummy.com?password=test&username=b...@dummy.com
You can probably direct-parse the URI using getAuthority() to get the
part before the question mark and getQuery() for the rest, looking for
embedded @. I did a workaround in my application instead:
final Endpoint inmail = camelcontext.getEndpoint("imap://" + server +
"?delete=true");
MailEndpoint minmail = (MailEndpoint) inmail;
MailConfiguration mconfig = minmail.getConfiguration();
mconfig.setUsername(username);
mconfig.setPassword(password);
- The mail component is dependent on Spring's JavaMailSender. Since I
don't use Spring I'm putting together a very lean substitute. Let me
know if you're interested.
Thanks again for the help...
Don
On Mon, Apr 25, 2011 at 12:50 PM, Donald Whytock <dwhyt...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Using Apache James at the moment. The current stable version of that
> (2.3.2) doesn't support IMAP. ("A backport to James Server 2.3.2 would
> require a volunteer.")
>
> I have another localhost server I can try. Might work better anyway.
> Ideally, the production app won't be running on a localhost email
> server...
>
> On Sat, Apr 23, 2011 at 3:22 AM, Claus Ibsen <claus.ib...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi
>>
>> Ah try using imap instead of pop3. pop3 is very limited and it may not
>> work setting those flags. I think we have seen this in the past
>> setting the flags to SEEN or DELETED etc.
>>
>> We have a little tip about use imap instead of pop3 at the wiki page
>> http://camel.apache.org/mail.html
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 9:27 PM, Donald Whytock <dwhyt...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> At the moment my route is very short:
>>>
>>> from("pop3://bot@localhost?password=test")
>>> .process(message1)
>>> .process(peeker)
>>> .choice()
>>> .when(property("chatterbot.email").isNotNull())
>>> .to("seda:mailtester");
>>>
>>> from("seda:mailtester")
>>> .routeId("listener.test")
>>> .process(message3);
>>>
>>> Peeker verifies the "from" header against a table; if found, it
>>> changes the message body to String and sets chatterbot.email to
>>> "true". Message1 and message3 kick out static messages to System.out.
>>> The seda:mailtester consumer is in a different Felix bundle from the
>>> mail consumer. Very little processing, very little time.
>>>
>>> I can send it an email, which it will pick up. Message 1 fires,
>>> peeker shows the from address and body, message3 fires, and then I see
>>> the debug log say the DELETED flag was set on the message ("Exchange
>>> processed, so flagging message as DELETED"). A bit later I see the
>>> same message being picked up again, and again the DELETED flag is set.
>>> Occasionally I'll see the message picked up a third time. After that
>>> the message doesn't get picked up again.
>>>
>>> Oddly, if I remove the routeId(), it stops happening. If I put the
>>> routeId() back in, the problem happens again.
>>>
>>> On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 5:00 AM, Claus Ibsen <claus.ib...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 8:50 PM, Donald Whytock <dwhyt...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> Okay, it's not ROUTE_STOP, or not necessarily. I've been getting
>>>>> mixed results with email deletion. In all cases I see the message
>>>>> "Exchange processed, so flagging message as DELETED" coming from
>>>>> MailConsumer.processCommit() as the exchange's onCompletion is run,
>>>>> but in some cases the email doesn't actually get deleted, and shows up
>>>>> again in the queues with the next polling.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> How long time do it take to process the exchange, when you notice the
>>>> email isn't deleted?
>>>> Maybe the mail session times out, and it wont re-connect to set the
>>>> DELETED flag.
>>>> There should be something in the logs as camel-mail log at DEBUG level
>>>> when it attempts to delete the mail.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> I've removed and restored things I'm doing in my routes, and nothing
>>>>> consistently causes the email to not be deleted. I'm at the point now
>>>>> where, without changing the route, I see a message appear once, twice
>>>>> or three times (varying) before it gets deleted.
>>>>>
>>>>> Is there a timeout on message deletion, such that if my route takes
>>>>> too long the message won't get deleted? Do I need to copy the
>>>>> exchange as soon as I get it, finish with the original and run with
>>>>> the copy?
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 11:35 AM, Donald Whytock <dwhyt...@gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> But if I do filter on the pipeline it'll determine whether the entire
>>>>>> pipeline is or isn't performed, right? So to break out of the
>>>>>> pipeline I'd have to put the filter on each pipelined item, such as
>>>>>>
>>>>>> from X
>>>>>> filter when Y
>>>>>> to A
>>>>>> filter when Y
>>>>>> to B
>>>>>> end // filter
>>>>>> to C // do something after filter for all messages
>>>>>>
>>>>>> so as to pick up when Y became false.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Since I use an instance of Pipeline with an ArrayList of Processors,
>>>>>> this would become an ArrayList of FilterProcessor(predicate,
>>>>>> processor)?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 4:59 AM, Claus Ibsen <claus.ib...@gmail.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 12:42 AM, Donald Whytock <dwhyt...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>> I ask because it appears to, in my application where I'm using
>>>>>>>> ROUTE_STOP to break out of a pipeline.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Perhaps there should be some mechanism for breaking out of a pipeline
>>>>>>>> without killing the whole route? A PIPELINE_STOP property, or maybe
>>>>>>>> ROUTE_STOP could contain the ID of the route to be broken out of,
>>>>>>>> allowing containing routes to continue?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You can use the filter EIP to only process messages based on a
>>>>>>> predicate.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> from X
>>>>>>> filter when Y
>>>>>>> to A
>>>>>>> to B
>>>>>>> end // filter
>>>>>>> to C // do something after filter for all messages
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 3:40 PM, Donald Whytock <dwhyt...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Hi all...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Does using ROUTE_STOP on an email exchange prevent the message from
>>>>>>>>> being deleted from the POP3 server?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Don
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Claus Ibsen
>>>>>>> -----------------
>>>>>>> FuseSource
>>>>>>> Email: cib...@fusesource.com
>>>>>>> Web: http://fusesource.com
>>>>>>> CamelOne 2011: http://fusesource.com/camelone2011/
>>>>>>> Twitter: davsclaus
>>>>>>> Blog: http://davsclaus.blogspot.com/
>>>>>>> Author of Camel in Action: http://www.manning.com/ibsen/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Claus Ibsen
>>>> -----------------
>>>> FuseSource
>>>> Email: cib...@fusesource.com
>>>> Web: http://fusesource.com
>>>> CamelOne 2011: http://fusesource.com/camelone2011/
>>>> Twitter: davsclaus
>>>> Blog: http://davsclaus.blogspot.com/
>>>> Author of Camel in Action: http://www.manning.com/ibsen/
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Claus Ibsen
>> -----------------
>> FuseSource
>> Email: cib...@fusesource.com
>> Web: http://fusesource.com
>> CamelOne 2011: http://fusesource.com/camelone2011/
>> Twitter: davsclaus
>> Blog: http://davsclaus.blogspot.com/
>> Author of Camel in Action: http://www.manning.com/ibsen/
>>
>
