You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to server-dev@james.apache.org by no...@apache.org on 2005/05/04 02:00:53 UTC
svn commit: r168024 - in /james/server/branches/merge_v2_and_trunk:
build.xml include.properties
Author: noel
Date: Tue May 3 17:00:52 2005
New Revision: 168024
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs?rev=168024&view=rev
Log:
update oro library, and at least temporarily change dist-bin to not require xdocs or javadocs
Modified:
james/server/branches/merge_v2_and_trunk/build.xml
james/server/branches/merge_v2_and_trunk/include.properties
Modified: james/server/branches/merge_v2_and_trunk/build.xml
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs/james/server/branches/merge_v2_and_trunk/build.xml?rev=168024&r1=168023&r2=168024&view=diff
==============================================================================
--- james/server/branches/merge_v2_and_trunk/build.xml (original)
+++ james/server/branches/merge_v2_and_trunk/build.xml Tue May 3 17:00:52 2005
@@ -488,7 +488,7 @@
</lib>
<lib dir="lib">
<include name="dnsjava-1.6.2.jar"/>
- <include name="jakarta-oro-2.0.1.jar"/>
+ <include name="jakarta-oro-2.0.8.jar"/>
<include name="mm.mysql-2.0.14.jar"/>
<include name="mm.mysql.LICENCE"/>
<include name="avalon-framework-4.1.3.jar"/>
@@ -585,7 +585,8 @@
<delete file="${dist.binary.dir}/${name}-binary-${version}.tar"/>
</target>
- <target name="dist-bin-common" depends="dist-lite,xdocs,javadocs">
+ <!-- target name="dist-bin-common" depends="dist-lite,xdocs,javadocs" -->
+ <target name="dist-bin-common" depends="dist-lite">
<echo message ="Building binary distributions"/>
<property name="dist.binary.dir" value="${dist.dir}/downloads/bin"/>
<mkdir dir="${dist.binary.dir}"/>
Modified: james/server/branches/merge_v2_and_trunk/include.properties
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs/james/server/branches/merge_v2_and_trunk/include.properties?rev=168024&r1=168023&r2=168024&view=diff
==============================================================================
--- james/server/branches/merge_v2_and_trunk/include.properties (original)
+++ james/server/branches/merge_v2_and_trunk/include.properties Tue May 3 17:00:52 2005
@@ -69,7 +69,7 @@
commons-collections.jar=${candidates.dir}/commons-collections-2.1.jar
# ----- Jakarta ORO -----
-jakarta-oro.jar=${lib.dir}/jakarta-oro-2.0.1.jar
+jakarta-oro.jar=${lib.dir}/jakarta-oro-2.0.8.jar
# ----- Cornerstone threads, version 1.0 or later -----
cornerstone-threads.jar=${candidates.dir}/cornerstone-threads-api-1.0.jar
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-dev-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: server-dev-help@james.apache.org
RE: JAMES ... now that we (may be) merged, where to?
Posted by Jason Webb <jw...@inovem.com>.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Danny Angus [mailto:danny.angus@gmail.com]
> Sent: 04 May 2005 16:22
> To: James Developers List
> Subject: Re: JAMES ... now that we (may be) merged, where to?
>
> On 04/05/05, Noel J. Bergman <no...@devtech.com> wrote:
>
> > For version 3, then ...
> >
> > - the last Avalon-specific version? POJO is a v4 branch?
>
> Well I actually thought that that would be v3 and we'd move towards it,
>
> 3a1 - stable merge
> 3a2 - pojo
I need a stable merge point (when Noel says so :)) so I can put in the IMAP
branch. If people reckon the current HEAD is good now then I'll branch it
straight away.
>
> get it?
> Perhaps its too complicated and we should just call this the last 2X?
>
> d.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-dev-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: server-dev-help@james.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-dev-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: server-dev-help@james.apache.org
Re: JAMES ... now that we (may be) merged, where to?
Posted by Danny Angus <da...@gmail.com>.
On 04/05/05, Noel J. Bergman <no...@devtech.com> wrote:
> For version 3, then ...
>
> - the last Avalon-specific version? POJO is a v4 branch?
Well I actually thought that that would be v3 and we'd move towards it,
3a1 - stable merge
3a2 - pojo
get it?
Perhaps its too complicated and we should just call this the last 2X?
d.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-dev-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: server-dev-help@james.apache.org
Re: JAMES ... now that we (may be) merged, where to?
Posted by ap...@bago.org.
> Well, hopefully I'm not the only one looking at this code.
> :-) But I'll do a few more tests, and if it doesn't go legs
> up, I'll move it to trunk.
I'm applying my local patches and preparing for the tests.
> > the merge [is] the foundation upon which [version 3] will evolve.
>
> For version 3, then ...
>
> - the last Avalon-specific version? POJO is a v4 branch?
> - when we do fork JDK 1.3 off?
>
> Thoughts?
I'm not a committer, but IMHO this new "merge" should be soon a 2.3 release,
the last Avalon-specific.
v3 will be POJO/jdk1.4
There are no many differences with the current 2.2.1-dev to switch to a 3.0
and I think that it is backward compatible with 2.2.x, isn't it?
Stefano
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-dev-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: server-dev-help@james.apache.org
RE: JAMES ... now that we (may be) merged, where to?
Posted by "Noel J. Bergman" <no...@devtech.com>.
Danny Angus wrote:
> > If this merged code works, what do we want to do about a release?
> Well my +1 would be forthcoming to a proposal to smoke test and
> release it as the first 3 alpha.
Well, hopefully I'm not the only one looking at this code. :-) But I'll do
a few more tests, and if it doesn't go legs up, I'll move it to trunk.
> the merge [is] the foundation upon which [version 3] will evolve.
For version 3, then ...
- the last Avalon-specific version? POJO is a v4 branch?
- when we do fork JDK 1.3 off?
Thoughts?
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-dev-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: server-dev-help@james.apache.org
Re: JAMES ... now that we (may be) merged, where to?
Posted by Danny Angus <da...@gmail.com>.
On 04/05/05, Noel J. Bergman <no...@devtech.com> wrote:
> If this merged code works, what do we want to do about a release?
Well my +1 would be forthcoming to a proposal to smoke test and
release it as the first 3 alpha.
If we "advertise" it carefully it will be clear that it is an unstable
release of the merge which in turn is the foundation upon which 3
(said in Darth Vader voice (Am I showing my age now?)) will evolve.
d.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-dev-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: server-dev-help@james.apache.org
Re: JAMES ... now that we (may be) merged, where to?
Posted by Danny Angus <da...@gmail.com>.
On 09/05/05, apache@bago.org <ap...@bago.org> wrote:
> > However, my primary interests in contributing to James have
> > been the POJOfication of James, which seams to have been
> > placed on the back burner, and MINA. I'm also not sure how
> > to proceed with using MINA within James since doing so would
> > require JDK 1.5 which does not seam to be kosher for the time being.
>
> I think POJOfication is currently a must: other commiters have more TODOs in
> the list but I think we all want POJO!
> This first step of trunk/branch_2_1_fcs merge that updated to the latest
> phoenix was only a needed step to have a common codebase!
Yeah, I know it isn;t top of other people's lists but it is, and has
been for as long as I can remember, near the top of mine.
I think you'll also find that Serge has long held the ambition for
James to be Avalon-agnostic if not avalon-free so without second
guessing him I'm sure any effort put into removing direct container
dependance would be well worth your effort.
Removing container dependance is IMO important for the project's
survival, specifically dealing with Avalon's closure in a practical
way is important to demonstrate that James isn't going to be
end-of-lined.
All of our ambitions for James depend upon the continued sucess of the
project, and that depends upon us addressing the container issue. It
is the elephant in the living room, do what we like we can't ignore
it.
d.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-dev-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: server-dev-help@james.apache.org
Re: JAMES ... now that we (may be) merged, where to?
Posted by ap...@bago.org.
> However, my primary interests in contributing to James have
> been the POJOfication of James, which seams to have been
> placed on the back burner, and MINA. I'm also not sure how
> to proceed with using MINA within James since doing so would
> require JDK 1.5 which does not seam to be kosher for the time being.
I think POJOfication is currently a must: other commiters have more TODOs in
the list but I think we all want POJO!
This first step of trunk/branch_2_1_fcs merge that updated to the latest
phoenix was only a needed step to have a common codebase!
About your MINA components that could be integrated later, well, I think
that this would be great and could be inserted to james as a set of "jdk 1.5
only" components. James so could run in java 1.4 but if one can use java 1.5
then he will benefits from your mina based implementations of SMTP/POP and
more services.
Stefano
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-dev-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: server-dev-help@james.apache.org
RE: JAMES ... now that we (may be) merged, where to?
Posted by Mike Heath <mi...@cycletime.com>.
On Wed, 2005-05-04 at 13:18 -0400, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
<snip>
> And the comments I made to Stefano about Committer status apply to you, too.
I appreciate the encouragement to join the James project as a committer.
However, my primary interests in contributing to James have been the
POJOfication of James, which seams to have been placed on the back
burner, and MINA. I'm also not sure how to proceed with using MINA
within James since doing so would require JDK 1.5 which does not seam to
be kosher for the time being.
The route I am taking now is to build an extensible messaging framework
based on MINA that supports SMTP, NNTP, POP and IMAP. James would
hopefully integrate this framework in the future. I think this is a
sensible approach given the fact that I've received feedback from a few
individuals who are interested in a lightweight message protocol
framework to integrate with their offerings.
I'm certainly not discounting the opportunity to become a committer.
I'm just not sure how my ambitions align with James' current priorities.
-Mike
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-dev-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: server-dev-help@james.apache.org
RE: JAMES ... now that we (may be) merged, where to?
Posted by "Noel J. Bergman" <no...@devtech.com>.
Mike Heath wrote:
> Noel J. Bergman wrote:
> > I would like to get this version stable, and we can branch it as a JDK
> > 1.3 branch, so that we'll have something good for people still stuck
> > on JDK 1.3. Then we can look at moving mainstream development (trunk)
> > to require JDK 1.4.
> If James is to use Mina and is to support TLS, we'll have to use JDK
> 1.5.
Yes, I know.
> Obviously *I* would like to see James incorporate my Mina based
> SMTP handler.
So would I. However, this is where we run into some issues and some
options.
First, the server is a pluggable component, so we can build different
packages for JDK 1.3 and JDK 1.5. Second, if the NIO code were in the
connection area instead of the handler, itself, that would be an even
smaller set of code that needed to be plugged. But that may not be a
worthwhile tradeoff, especially with all of the other work you've done, so
we go back to pluggable servers.
And the comments I made to Stefano about Committer status apply to you, too.
--- Noel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-dev-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: server-dev-help@james.apache.org
Re: JAMES ... now that we (may be) merged, where to?
Posted by ap...@bago.org.
> If James is to use Mina and is to support TLS, we'll have to
> use JDK 1.5. Obviously *I* would like to see James
> incorporate my Mina based SMTP handler.
It would be cool to use jdk1.5 but I think that jdk1.5 requirement would be
a limitation for the spreading of the new version.
We should stick to jdk1.4 for 1 year at least. And if we want to provide
J2EE integration we NEED to be at least jdk1.4 compatible.
> I would also like to see annotations make there way into the
> mailet API.
> I think annotated mailets could simplify a lot of things for
> the developer.
I don't see how annotations could greatly improve mailet creation for the
developer.
There are not XML configuration files for the current mailet.
> BTW - I should have support for STARTTLS finished tonight or tomorrow.
Great!
Stefano
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-dev-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: server-dev-help@james.apache.org
Re: JAMES ... now that we (may be) merged, where to?
Posted by Mike Heath <mi...@cycletime.com>.
On Tue, 2005-05-03 at 22:11 -0400, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
> > Were we thinking of requiring JDK 1.4 for James 3.0? If so, we could
> > move to using java.util.regex, eh?
>
> I would like to get this version stable, and we can branch it as a JDK
> 1.3 branch, so that we'll have something good for people still stuck
> on JDK 1.3. Then we can look at moving mainstream development (trunk)
> to require JDK 1.4.
If James is to use Mina and is to support TLS, we'll have to use JDK
1.5. Obviously *I* would like to see James incorporate my Mina based
SMTP handler.
I would also like to see annotations make there way into the mailet API.
I think annotated mailets could simplify a lot of things for the
developer.
<snip>
-Mike
BTW - I should have support for STARTTLS finished tonight or tomorrow.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-dev-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: server-dev-help@james.apache.org
Re: JAMES ... now that we (may be) merged, where to?
Posted by ap...@bago.org.
> High up on my personal priority list is getting the
> in-process processor into the system.
I attached my proposed changes against the "merge" branch.
I removed the spool handling from the LinearProcessor and changed the
spoolmanager processing so that it take a mail from it's first processor to
the last one in one single "run" and not with 1 run per processor (I can't
see drawbacks and it speeds up things).
Stefano
JAMES ... now that we (may be) merged, where to?
Posted by "Noel J. Bergman" <no...@devtech.com>.
> Were we thinking of requiring JDK 1.4 for James 3.0? If so, we could
> move to using java.util.regex, eh?
I would like to get this version stable, and we can branch it as a JDK 1.3 branch, so that we'll have something good for people still stuck on JDK 1.3. Then we can look at moving mainstream development (trunk) to require JDK 1.4.
As for oro vs j.u.regex, we'd have to compare to see. I'm comfortable with Oro. It works, we have good code for it, we understand any threading issues. But if someone else wants to make the effort ...
If this merged code works, what do we want to do about a release? We've got some pending changes we can start making again. <<whew>> And I'd like to see some of the new contributors submitting patches and working towards Committership.
High up on my personal priority list is getting the in-process processor into the system.
--- Noel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-dev-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: server-dev-help@james.apache.org
Re: svn commit: r168024 - in /james/server/branches/merge_v2_and_trunk:
build.xml include.properties
Posted by Serge Knystautas <se...@lokitech.com>.
noel@apache.org wrote:
> Author: noel
> Date: Tue May 3 17:00:52 2005
> New Revision: 168024
>
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs?rev=168024&view=rev
> Log:
> update oro library, and at least temporarily change dist-bin to not require xdocs or javadocs
Were we thinking of requiring JDK 1.4 for James 3.0? If so, we could
move to using java.util.regex, eh?
--
Serge Knystautas
Lokitech >> software . strategy . design >> http://www.lokitech.com
p. 301.656.5501
e. sergek@lokitech.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-dev-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: server-dev-help@james.apache.org