RE: Question re: virtuser mailet

[Robert Cadena <ro...@machine501.com>]

No problem.  I'll get back to you if I have questions.

/r

-----Original Message-----
From: Noel J. Bergman [mailto:noel@devtech.com]
Sent: Sunday, May 11, 2003 22:10
To: robert@machine501.com
Subject: RE: Question re: virtuser mailet


The procedure is documented on the site.  In this case, the best thing will
be to provide the two new files (the base and the file implementation), and
a complete replacement for JDBCVirtualUserTable instead of a patch.

	--- Noel

-----Original Message-----
From: Robert Cadena [mailto:robert@machine501.com]
Sent: Sunday, May 11, 2003 21:45
To: 'Noel J. Bergman'
Subject: RE: Question re: virtuser mailet


Yeah,

I'll work on it and submit it.   I'll figure out what the procedure for that
is or just let me know if I should submit code to you.

/r

-----Original Message-----
From: Noel J. Bergman [mailto:noel@devtech.com]
Sent: Sunday, May 11, 2003 5:38 PM
To: robert@machine501.com
Subject: RE: Question re: virtuser mailet


Robert,

Well, it seems to me that we have to modify both classes to fit under a
common one.  My thought was to take JDBCVirtualUserTable (have to start
somewhere), pull the common behavior up into a base AbstractVirtualUserTable
class, pull in the additional behavior from your class, and then use
something like:

    public abstract String mapAddress(MailAddress) throws
MessagingException;

in the mapping implementation.

My other current thoughts relate to the "error" type entry.  Should we do
something more flexible?  Something like "<prefix>:" is mapped to:

    public void <prefix>Handler(MailAddress, String) throws
MessagingException;

e.g., "error: blah blah" is mapped by reflection to:

    public void errorHandler(MailAddress, String) throws MessagingException;

Just a thought, perhaps, for another iteration.

Anyhow, is this something you'd like to work on and submit?

	--- Noel

-----Original Message-----
From: Robert Cadena [mailto:robert@machine501.com]
Sent: Sunday, May 11, 2003 15:33
To: 'Noel J. Bergman'
Subject: RE: Question re: virtuser mailet


You probably did miss it.  I'd be happy to.  What would you need me to do?

/r

-----Original Message-----
From: Noel J. Bergman [mailto:noel@devtech.com]
Sent: Sunday, May 11, 2003 9:43 AM
To: Robert Cadena
Subject: RE: Question re: virtuser mailet


I can't locate a reply to this ... did I miss it?

Would you be interested in working on merging the two under a common base
class?

	--- Noel

-----Original Message-----
From: Noel J. Bergman [mailto:noel@devtech.com]
Sent: Monday, April 14, 2003 17:35
To: Robert Cadena
Subject: RE: Question re: virtuser mailet


It isn't wasted.  I was going to ask, on that other thread separately, if
you would like to submit the code for inclusion in the James codebase.

Actually, I am thinking of combining the two mailets with a common base
class and separate classes depending on the nature of the mapping engine.

	--- Noel

-----Original Message-----
From: Robert Cadena [mailto:robert@machine501.com]
Sent: Monday, April 14, 2003 17:04
To: Noel J. Bergman
Subject: Question re: virtuser mailet


hi,

thanks for the help.  i'm installing the updates and will send an email if
the problem gets fixed.  i wanted to know, however, if the mailet i created
doesn't replicate some functionality (other than
JDBCVirtualUserTable) already provided by some other packet.  i just wanted
to know if it wasn't a totally wasted effort.

/r





---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: james-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: james-user-help@jakarta.apache.org