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 "Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@apache.org> on 2002/08/28 14:40:07 UTC
Re: [PATCH] IMAP - Append Command
Personally, I think we should look for a way to componentize JAMES far
enough to where building in IMAP is as simple as flicking a switch so
that there is no need for a divergent versions of things.
-Andy
Danny Angus wrote:
> Sascha,
>
> I'm happy to work with you to get these changes in, then to assess IMAP and
> propose a vote if it appears to be half way stable,
> but
> 1/ please could you help me by making your patches conform to the guidelines
> http://jakarta.apache.org/james/contribute.html
> diff -u from the /proposals/imap dir, and zip new files from there too. Then
> I don't have to work out paths, and go looking for files to patch.
>
> and
> 2/ Perhaps if I add a task to the main build file that will build James with
> IMAP that would be a reasonable interim before we put it back into the HEAD.
>
> d.
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
James and Sendmail
Posted by Danny Angus <da...@apache.org>.
Hello there everybody..
I've done it :-)
I've configured sendmail to relay all outgoing mail, including local,
username-only, and remote mail, through James on the same box, even using
SMTP AUTH where James is requiring AUTH.
Look out for a new HOW-TO.
:D
d.
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: [PATCH] IMAP - Append Command
Posted by "Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@apache.org>.
Cool. Then it sounds pretty sensible to move it to the main trunk at
this point.
Sascha Kulawik wrote:
>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: news [mailto:news@main.gmane.org] On Behalf Of Andrew C. Oliver
>>Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2002 2:40 PM
>>To: james-dev@jakarta.apache.org
>>Subject: Re: [PATCH] IMAP - Append Command
>>
>>
>>Personally, I think we should look for a way to componentize
>>JAMES far
>>enough to where building in IMAP is as simple as flicking a switch so
>>that there is no need for a divergent versions of things.
>
>
> It IS currently possible to switch imap off or on - compiled in the main
> trunk. So it also would be possible to let the IMAP-Trunk reside inside
> the Main-Trunk.
>
> Sascha
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: [PATCH] IMAP - Append Command
Posted by "Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@apache.org>.
Danny Angus wrote:
>>I think I'm learning this. I gave up for the night after a few hours of
>>trying to solve phoenix barfing and telling me what to do. I'm probably
>>going to try the reverse. Copy build.xml over build-imap.xml versus
>>trying to solve all build-imap.xml's issues and try and figure out what
>>needs to go in it to make it build the imap stuff.
>
>
> This should be fairly simple, I don't think there is anything IMAP specific
> about the IMAP build, except that it is a fork of an older build.xml file.
>
There are a few things in it specific to the proposals dir, etc.
>
>
>>Here is what I have to do to get it to work:
>>1. check out the 2.03a branch
>>2. muck with those (inc the normal) build files until they can actually
>>find ant on unix as advertised (the docs and stuff LIE LIKE DOGS, I just
>>don't know what of my tinkering actually worked)
>
>
> Some of the docs are way out-of-date since the phoenix changes came in.
>
>
>>At some point if I get stumped would you be willing to take some patches
>>to the build, and see if you understand the phoenix issues its griping
>>about?
>
>
> Yes. if you have easy to reproduce breakages I'd be happy to give you
> pointers, but no too much time to fix stuff myself.
>
Great. Thanks.
> d.
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
RE: [PATCH] IMAP - Append Command
Posted by Danny Angus <da...@apache.org>.
> I think I'm learning this. I gave up for the night after a few hours of
> trying to solve phoenix barfing and telling me what to do. I'm probably
> going to try the reverse. Copy build.xml over build-imap.xml versus
> trying to solve all build-imap.xml's issues and try and figure out what
> needs to go in it to make it build the imap stuff.
This should be fairly simple, I don't think there is anything IMAP specific
about the IMAP build, except that it is a fork of an older build.xml file.
> Here is what I have to do to get it to work:
> 1. check out the 2.03a branch
> 2. muck with those (inc the normal) build files until they can actually
> find ant on unix as advertised (the docs and stuff LIE LIKE DOGS, I just
> don't know what of my tinkering actually worked)
Some of the docs are way out-of-date since the phoenix changes came in.
> At some point if I get stumped would you be willing to take some patches
> to the build, and see if you understand the phoenix issues its griping
> about?
Yes. if you have easy to reproduce breakages I'd be happy to give you
pointers, but no too much time to fix stuff myself.
d.
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: [PATCH] IMAP - Append Command
Posted by "Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@apache.org>.
Danny Angus wrote:
>>Eeenteresting. I'll take a look but I tried to build it 2 days ago and
>>I had a holy heck of a time getting it to build. the build-imap.xml
>>file seems to be expecting a drastically different directory structure
>>and locations than the HEAD.
>
>
> it pre-dates big changes that were made to upgrade phoenix.
>
I think I'm learning this. I gave up for the night after a few hours of
trying to solve phoenix barfing and telling me what to do. I'm probably
going to try the reverse. Copy build.xml over build-imap.xml versus
trying to solve all build-imap.xml's issues and try and figure out what
needs to go in it to make it build the imap stuff. This should
be...educational...since I know nothing of phoenix (or to be precise,
everything I ever read about it was in Latin). ;-)
>
>>I don't yet have time to sort this out but
>>my plan is this:
>>
>>1. Get build-imap.xml and build-test.xml to work out of the box when
>>checking out the head -- submit this
>
>
> +1
>
>
>>2. look into what it would take to move it into the head and submit that
>> ensuring its fully turn-offable
>
>
> Basically its not hard, its a conifg thing, but we *must* be able to deal
> with whatever the conflict in james.java is.
>
yes. I'll look at it and report back.
> I still don't think we'll be miving it back into the HEAD until its been
> shown to build *and* work, at least to some degree.
> (I can't get it to work)
>
Here is what I have to do to get it to work:
1. check out the 2.03a branch
2. muck with those (inc the normal) build files until they can actually
find ant on unix as advertised (the docs and stuff LIE LIKE DOGS, I just
don't know what of my tinkering actually worked)
3. update the proposals directory to the HEAD
3b. optional: rm -rf build dist (the target mentioned in the doc is
bogus)
4. Then follow the instructions (./build.sh -buildfile
proposals/imap/build-imap.xml)
Then you can run the unit tests (./build.sh -buildfile
proposals/imap/build-test.xml testimap)
The last few tests with fetch commands still fail, but the rest (that
the unit tests test) seems rational and up to spec. I'm even able to
get the folders (more or less) with Ximian Evolution.
I don't think we're far off from basic bare bones functionality. Just
some attention to detail (getting the build to work).
At some point if I get stumped would you be willing to take some patches
to the build, and see if you understand the phoenix issues its griping
about?
Thanks,
-Andy
> d.
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
RE: [PATCH] IMAP - Append Command
Posted by Sascha Kulawik <sa...@kulawik.de>.
> On Sun, 01 Sep 2002 11:51:37 -0400, Sascha Kulawik wrote:
>> No probb :)
>> I'm developing under Windows, so it was the easiest way to test the
>> IMAP functionality.
>> I've also a Linux Box here and will test the features also under
>> Evolution, Kmail and Mozilla.
> You can also use Mozilla on Windows.
>
Andrew,
correct, my standard-Browser under Windows is already Mozilla, but I
haven't installed the complete suite because of some problems using
Outlook and Mozilla side-by-side. My first step was to check the
functionality with ONE Mailclient then with 10 parallel. Now it is
functional under Outlook and Outlook Express, so I can test with other
Mailclients.
After testing with KMail and Evolution I want to check all commands, if
they are completely RFC2060 compilance implemented, but the first steps
for me was to bugfix the code and lean how it is implemented.
So beware, that I will do that this week.
The problem is, that the FETCH, LIST and SEARCH Commands are very complex,
and so it was the first step to get this stuff working. I'm thinking of a
complete redesign of these commands, but right now a patch would be all
what we need :)
Regards,
Sascha
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
RE: [PATCH] IMAP - Append Command
Posted by "Andrew C. Oliver" <an...@superlinksoftware.com>.
On Sun, 01 Sep 2002 11:51:37 -0400, Sascha Kulawik wrote:
>> > If you copy the files out of the proposals directory and inside the
>> > main directory and upgrade the needed files that are redundant with
>> > the main trunk, it will be full functional. (After that
>> compile James
>> > as like without IMAP). Currently Ive tested with Outlook
>> and Outlook
>> > Express with no bigger problems, so you can test all of the
>> features.
>> >
>> >
>> I have no need for email viruses. No chance I'm installing that piece
>> of junk on one of my machines.
>
> No probb :)
> I'm developing under Windows, so it was the easiest way to test the IMAP
> functionality.
> I've also a Linux Box here and will test the features also under
> Evolution, Kmail and Mozilla.
>
You can also use Mozilla on Windows.
-Andy
> Regards,
>
> Sascha
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: [PATCH] IMAP - Append Command
Posted by "Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@apache.org>.
Cool I'll have to check that out! That should be nice for writing unit
tests!
lution, Kmail and Mozilla.
>
>
> You might want to test with a Pine client. As I recall, you can set Pine
> to protocol debug and easily see what it is trying to do (or what
> responses from James it doesn't like).
>
> Charles
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: [PATCH] IMAP - Append Command
Posted by Charles Benett <ch...@benett1.demon.co.uk>.
Sascha Kulawik wrote:
>>>If you copy the files out of the proposals directory and inside the
>>>main directory and upgrade the needed files that are redundant with
>>>the main trunk, it will be full functional. (After that
>>
>>compile James
>>
>>>as like without IMAP). Currently Ive tested with Outlook
>>
>>and Outlook
>>
>>>Express with no bigger problems, so you can test all of the
>>
>>features.
>>
>>I have no need for email viruses. No chance I'm installing
>>that piece
>>of junk on one of my machines.
>
>
> No probb :)
> I'm developing under Windows, so it was the easiest way to test the IMAP
> functionality.
> I've also a Linux Box here and will test the features also under
> Evolution, Kmail and Mozilla.
You might want to test with a Pine client. As I recall, you can set Pine
to protocol debug and easily see what it is trying to do (or what
responses from James it doesn't like).
Charles
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
RE: [PATCH] IMAP - Append Command
Posted by Sascha Kulawik <sa...@kulawik.de>.
> > If you copy the files out of the proposals directory and inside the
> > main directory and upgrade the needed files that are redundant with
> > the main trunk, it will be full functional. (After that
> compile James
> > as like without IMAP). Currently Ive tested with Outlook
> and Outlook
> > Express with no bigger problems, so you can test all of the
> features.
> >
>
> I have no need for email viruses. No chance I'm installing
> that piece
> of junk on one of my machines.
No probb :)
I'm developing under Windows, so it was the easiest way to test the IMAP
functionality.
I've also a Linux Box here and will test the features also under
Evolution, Kmail and Mozilla.
Regards,
Sascha
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: [PATCH] IMAP - Append Command
Posted by "Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@apache.org>.
Sascha Kulawik wrote:
>>>Eeenteresting. I'll take a look but I tried to build it 2 days ago
>>>and I had a holy heck of a time getting it to build. the
>>>build-imap.xml file seems to be expecting a drastically different
>>>directory structure and locations than the HEAD.
>>
>>it pre-dates big changes that were made to upgrade phoenix.
>
>
> The changes are done - and it was comitted on Tuesday.
>
Ehhh? I check out the head and it doesn't work.
>
>>>I don't yet have time to sort this out but
>>>my plan is this:
>>>
>>>1. Get build-imap.xml and build-test.xml to work out of the
>>
>>box when
>>
>>>checking out the head -- submit this
>>
>>+1
>
>
> The build-test.xml will be done by Stefan Schiessling, I'm not a
> ANT-Wizard, so I havent changed the build-file for the IMAP trunk. But
> is this needed, if IMAP will be in the Main trunk ?
>
It is needed to prove IMAP should be in the main trunk.
>
>>>2. look into what it would take to move it into the head
>>
>>and submit that
>>
>>> ensuring its fully turn-offable
>>
>>Basically its not hard, its a conifg thing, but we *must* be
>>able to deal with whatever the conflict in james.java is.
>>
>>I still don't think we'll be miving it back into the HEAD
>>until its been shown to build *and* work, at least to some
>>degree. (I can't get it to work)
>
>
> If you copy the files out of the proposals directory and inside the main
> directory and upgrade the needed files that are redundant with the main
> trunk, it will be full functional. (After that compile James as like
> without IMAP). Currently Ive tested with Outlook and Outlook Express
> with no bigger problems, so you can test all of the features.
>
I have no need for email viruses. No chance I'm installing that piece
of junk on one of my machines.
-Andy
> Sascha
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: [PATCH] IMAP - Append Command
Posted by "Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@apache.org>.
Danny Angus wrote:
>>Oh I totally agree with that. My only issue is that SOME client other
>>than outlook should be able to list the folders and get a message.
>
>
> Oh, fine, we're just splittin' hairs then :-)
I think so yes.
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
RE: [PATCH] IMAP - Append Command
Posted by Danny Angus <da...@apache.org>.
> Oh I totally agree with that. My only issue is that SOME client other
> than outlook should be able to list the folders and get a message.
Oh, fine, we're just splittin' hairs then :-)
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: [PATCH] IMAP - Append Command
Posted by "Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@apache.org>.
Danny Angus wrote:
>>I think for the purpose of ensuring that we're compatible with actual
>>IMAP and not "MSIMAP" (probably a tm) having Mozilla or Eudora, etc
>>should be the guiding principal for judging this.
>>
>>This is however far less important to me than the unit tests
>>issue. I think they are
>>essential to a high quality IMAP implementation and I'm not apt to waste
>>my time creating low quality anything.
>
>
> No, fine, I completely agree.
> What I would say is that IMHO it isn't necessary to wait until we have a
> 100% sparkling product ready before we start to include it in James HEAD or
> in standard distro's, given suitable disclaimers.
Oh I totally agree with that. My only issue is that SOME client other
than outlook should be able to list the folders and get a message.
> In fact I believe that its inclusion would help to encourage the development
> effort, provide useful feedback and enlarge the team of active participants.
> We all know how to judge stds compliance, and I agree that unit testing is
> the way to go with regard to formalising this. But its also true, as we've
> already seen in James, that expected behaviour, and indeed "normal practice"
> isn't always completely aligned with standards' specifications, so to "gain
> market share" you have to support both the std and the expected non-std
> situation.
>
Of course! And writing unit tests that mimic abberant behavior of say
Outlook or Mozilla for instance is a good way to test these.
> I'm strongly of the opinion that these two different drivers, standards
> compliance and operation in real-life situations will drive development
> forward in unison, with no question about reduced quality. The standards
> based approach is being tackled already, the real-life drivers will appear
> once we start making access to IMAP easier for end-users.
>
agreed.
> My main point being that I don't believe we have to claim the product is
> complete, just that it will provide some basic semblance of operation for us
> to start to make it available, I don't see why we shouldn't aim for a "high
> quality IMAP implementation" yet still release work in progress early and
> often, and get feedback from potential users.
>
agreed. My issues:
1. Some client other than outlook (preferrably one that runs on some
*nix) should be able to list the folders (that works) and get some mail
(nope)
2. The unit tests must go with the code.
I totally agree with everything you said.
-Andy
> d.
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: [PATCH] IMAP - Append Command
Posted by Charles Benett <ch...@benett1.demon.co.uk>.
Danny Angus wrote:
>>I think for the purpose of ensuring that we're compatible with actual
>>IMAP and not "MSIMAP" (probably a tm) having Mozilla or Eudora, etc
>>should be the guiding principal for judging this.
>>
>>This is however far less important to me than the unit tests
>>issue. I think they are
>>essential to a high quality IMAP implementation and I'm not apt to waste
>>my time creating low quality anything.
>
>
> No, fine, I completely agree.
> What I would say is that IMHO it isn't necessary to wait until we have a
> 100% sparkling product ready before we start to include it in James HEAD or
> in standard distro's, given suitable disclaimers.
> In fact I believe that its inclusion would help to encourage the development
> effort, provide useful feedback and enlarge the team of active participants.
> We all know how to judge stds compliance, and I agree that unit testing is
> the way to go with regard to formalising this. But its also true, as we've
> already seen in James, that expected behaviour, and indeed "normal practice"
> isn't always completely aligned with standards' specifications, so to "gain
> market share" you have to support both the std and the expected non-std
> situation.
>
> I'm strongly of the opinion that these two different drivers, standards
> compliance and operation in real-life situations will drive development
> forward in unison, with no question about reduced quality. The standards
> based approach is being tackled already, the real-life drivers will appear
> once we start making access to IMAP easier for end-users.
>
> My main point being that I don't believe we have to claim the product is
> complete, just that it will provide some basic semblance of operation for us
> to start to make it available, I don't see why we shouldn't aim for a "high
> quality IMAP implementation" yet still release work in progress early and
> often, and get feedback from potential users.
+1 I agree with Danny.
Charles
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
RE: [PATCH] IMAP - Append Command
Posted by Danny Angus <da...@apache.org>.
> I think for the purpose of ensuring that we're compatible with actual
> IMAP and not "MSIMAP" (probably a tm) having Mozilla or Eudora, etc
> should be the guiding principal for judging this.
>
> This is however far less important to me than the unit tests
> issue. I think they are
> essential to a high quality IMAP implementation and I'm not apt to waste
> my time creating low quality anything.
No, fine, I completely agree.
What I would say is that IMHO it isn't necessary to wait until we have a
100% sparkling product ready before we start to include it in James HEAD or
in standard distro's, given suitable disclaimers.
In fact I believe that its inclusion would help to encourage the development
effort, provide useful feedback and enlarge the team of active participants.
We all know how to judge stds compliance, and I agree that unit testing is
the way to go with regard to formalising this. But its also true, as we've
already seen in James, that expected behaviour, and indeed "normal practice"
isn't always completely aligned with standards' specifications, so to "gain
market share" you have to support both the std and the expected non-std
situation.
I'm strongly of the opinion that these two different drivers, standards
compliance and operation in real-life situations will drive development
forward in unison, with no question about reduced quality. The standards
based approach is being tackled already, the real-life drivers will appear
once we start making access to IMAP easier for end-users.
My main point being that I don't believe we have to claim the product is
complete, just that it will provide some basic semblance of operation for us
to start to make it available, I don't see why we shouldn't aim for a "high
quality IMAP implementation" yet still release work in progress early and
often, and get feedback from potential users.
d.
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
RE: [PATCH] IMAP - Append Command
Posted by "Andrew C. Oliver" <an...@superlinksoftware.com>.
On Sun, 01 Sep 2002 14:27:41 -0400, Danny Angus wrote:
>> Not that my opinon should matter much, but I'm -1 unless the test cases
>> go with it and can run (I'll help as much as my abillities allow). I
>> consider them absolutely crucial to having a solid standards-compliant
>> implementation.
>
> I would be +1 to have experimental IMAP in the head if..
>
> 1/ it was being actively developed
> 2/ it provided some basic functionality, not necessarily compliance or
> 100% of anything.
> 3/ was "off" by default in release builds.
>
> I think 1 & 3 are so, so my remaining objection is only 2, which Sacha
> believes is acchieved
>
>> Currently it does not work with either IMAP client I have access to
>> Mozilla or Ximian.
>
I think for the purpose of ensuring that we're compatible with actual
IMAP and not "MSIMAP" (probably a tm) having Mozilla or Eudora, etc
should be the guiding principal for judging this.
This is however far less important to me than the unit tests issue. I think they are
essential to a high quality IMAP implementation and I'm not apt to waste
my time creating low quality anything.
-Andy
> No, me either.
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
RE: [PATCH] IMAP - Append Command
Posted by "Andrew C. Oliver" <an...@superlinksoftware.com>.
On Sun, 01 Sep 2002 11:55:21 -0400, Sascha Kulawik wrote:
>> Not that my opinon should matter much, but I'm -1 unless the test cases
>> go with it and can run (I'll help as much as my abillities allow). I
>> consider them absolutely crucial to having a solid standards-compliant
>> implementation.
>>
>> Currently it does not work with either IMAP client I have access to
>> Mozilla or Ximian.
>
> Should I send you my working-dir of James ? :) I can't explain me, why
> you can't use it. Do you can explain, where your problem is ?
If you feel that will help. I suspect the problem is the FETCH comand is not
sufficiently implemented and both Mozilla and Ximian Evolution use the
FETCH command for retrieving messages.
Like I said, my opinion shouldn't count for much but I think this basic
functionality should be present before putting it in the head:
1. You should be able to get a list of folders (that seems to work)
2. You should be able to get your text-only messages (thats the part that doesn't
work)
3. Unit tests must go with it (they don't all have to work though)
-Andy
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
RE: [PATCH] IMAP - Append Command
Posted by "Andrew C. Oliver" <an...@superlinksoftware.com>.
On Mon, 02 Sep 2002 10:29:48 -0400, Danny Angus wrote:
>> No I'm afraid that the code will be merged without the test cases.
>> Anyhow all I said is that the test cases should move with the code.
>
> Oh, yeah they'll move with the code. IMAP was in the HEAD with its tests
> (I think) until quite recently, but we backed it out owing to lack of
> progress.
>
> d.
Then I'm happy with that :-)
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: [PATCH] IMAP - Append Command
Posted by "Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@apache.org>.
Sascha Kulawik wrote:
>>No I'm afraid that the code will be merged without the test cases.
>>Anyhow all I said is that the test cases should move with the code.
>>
>>Yes there are testcases that do not run now. That is not an issue. For
>>this type of development I personally prefer test-first design.
>>(meaning capture a subset of the spec or some mail client behavior and
>>record the expected responses....THEN make it actually so)
>
>
> It isn't easy as it seems. Within the FETCH Command you have a whole \
No its really easy to make test cases for this. Check it out.
-Andy
> different possiblities for getting the Body, as I've seen Mozilla does not
> especially declares, that he wants to get the body of the mail - thats the
> point why it currently don't views the message content.
> I think, today or tomorrow I'll will be ready with that.
> The other point is the Append command - in some cases not all of the
> header-fields are correct submitted.
> I like testing with something "living", like a real mailclient. Thats why
> I haven't checked the test-cases yet. IMHO Stephan wanted to check all of
> the test-cases.
>
> Regards,
> Sascha
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: [PATCH] IMAP - Append Command
Posted by Sascha Kulawik <sa...@kulawik.de>.
> No I'm afraid that the code will be merged without the test cases.
> Anyhow all I said is that the test cases should move with the code.
>
> Yes there are testcases that do not run now. That is not an issue. For
> this type of development I personally prefer test-first design.
> (meaning capture a subset of the spec or some mail client behavior and
> record the expected responses....THEN make it actually so)
It isn't easy as it seems. Within the FETCH Command you have a whole
different possiblities for getting the Body, as I've seen Mozilla does not
especially declares, that he wants to get the body of the mail - thats the
point why it currently don't views the message content.
I think, today or tomorrow I'll will be ready with that.
The other point is the Append command - in some cases not all of the
header-fields are correct submitted.
I like testing with something "living", like a real mailclient. Thats why
I haven't checked the test-cases yet. IMHO Stephan wanted to check all of
the test-cases.
Regards,
Sascha
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
RE: [PATCH] IMAP - Append Command
Posted by Danny Angus <da...@apache.org>.
> No I'm afraid that the code will be merged without the test cases.
> Anyhow all I said is that the test cases should move with the code.
Oh, yeah they'll move with the code. IMAP was in the HEAD with its tests (I
think) until quite recently, but we backed it out owing to lack of progress.
d.
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: [PATCH] IMAP - Append Command
Posted by "Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@apache.org>.
>
> Are there test cases that don't run now, or are you worried that moving
> it to the src dir will cause test cases to fail? (If the latter, why?).
>
> Charles
No I'm afraid that the code will be merged without the test cases.
Anyhow all I said is that the test cases should move with the code.
Yes there are testcases that do not run now. That is not an issue.
For this type of development I personally prefer test-first design.
(meaning capture a subset of the spec or some mail client behavior
and record the expected responses....THEN make it actually so)
-Andy
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: [PATCH] IMAP - Append Command
Posted by Charles Benett <ch...@benett1.demon.co.uk>.
Andrew C. Oliver wrote:
> Danny Angus wrote:
>
>>> If you copy the files out of the proposals directory and inside the main
>>> directory and upgrade the needed files that are redundant with the main
>>> trunk, it will be full functional. (After that compile James as like
>>> without IMAP). Currently Ive tested with Outlook and Outlook Express
>>> with no bigger problems, so you can test all of the features.
>>
>>
>>
>> Sascha,
>>
>> If I compile James with IMAP will James be exactly the same in
>> operation if
>> I don't enable IMAP, than James without IMAP compiled in?
>>
>> If the answer is yes, and I can make it work with at least one IMAP
>> client
>> then I'd be prepared to vote in favour of moving it back into the HEAD.
>
>
> Not that my opinon should matter much,
The opinion of anyone who is making a constructive contribution to the
topic matters.
> but I'm -1 unless the test cases
> go with it and can run (I'll help as much as my abillities allow). I
> consider them absolutely crucial to having a solid standards-compliant
> implementation.
Are there test cases that don't run now, or are you worried that moving
it to the src dir will cause test cases to fail? (If the latter, why?).
Charles
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
RE: [PATCH] IMAP - Append Command
Posted by Danny Angus <da...@apache.org>.
> Not that my opinon should matter much, but I'm -1 unless the test cases
> go with it and can run (I'll help as much as my abillities allow). I
> consider them absolutely crucial to having a solid standards-compliant
> implementation.
I would be +1 to have experimental IMAP in the head if..
1/ it was being actively developed
2/ it provided some basic functionality, not necessarily compliance or 100%
of anything.
3/ was "off" by default in release builds.
I think 1 & 3 are so, so my remaining objection is only 2, which Sacha
believes is acchieved
> Currently it does not work with either IMAP client I have access to
> Mozilla or Ximian.
No, me either.
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
RE: [PATCH] IMAP - Append Command
Posted by Sascha Kulawik <sa...@kulawik.de>.
> Not that my opinon should matter much, but I'm -1 unless the
> test cases
> go with it and can run (I'll help as much as my abillities allow). I
> consider them absolutely crucial to having a solid
> standards-compliant
> implementation.
>
> Currently it does not work with either IMAP client I have access to
> Mozilla or Ximian.
Should I send you my working-dir of James ? :) I can't explain me, why
you can't use it. Do you can explain, where your problem is ?
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: [PATCH] IMAP - Append Command
Posted by "Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@apache.org>.
Danny Angus wrote:
>>If you copy the files out of the proposals directory and inside the main
>>directory and upgrade the needed files that are redundant with the main
>>trunk, it will be full functional. (After that compile James as like
>>without IMAP). Currently Ive tested with Outlook and Outlook Express
>>with no bigger problems, so you can test all of the features.
>
>
> Sascha,
>
> If I compile James with IMAP will James be exactly the same in operation if
> I don't enable IMAP, than James without IMAP compiled in?
>
> If the answer is yes, and I can make it work with at least one IMAP client
> then I'd be prepared to vote in favour of moving it back into the HEAD.
Not that my opinon should matter much, but I'm -1 unless the test cases
go with it and can run (I'll help as much as my abillities allow). I
consider them absolutely crucial to having a solid standards-compliant
implementation.
Currently it does not work with either IMAP client I have access to
Mozilla or Ximian.
-Andy
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
RE: [PATCH] IMAP - Append Command
Posted by Sascha Kulawik <sa...@kulawik.de>.
> > If you copy the files out of the proposals directory and inside the
> > main directory and upgrade the needed files that are redundant with
> > the main trunk, it will be full functional. (After that
> compile James
> > as like without IMAP). Currently Ive tested with Outlook
> and Outlook
> > Express with no bigger problems, so you can test all of the
> features.
>
> Sascha,
>
> If I compile James with IMAP will James be exactly the same
> in operation if I don't enable IMAP, than James without IMAP
> compiled in?
>
> If the answer is yes, and I can make it work with at least
> one IMAP client then I'd be prepared to vote in favour of
> moving it back into the HEAD.
The answer is yes. The configuration variable will be readed inside
james.java and therefor a store will be choosed, so you can compile
everything with IMAP and don't use it.
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
RE: [PATCH] IMAP - Append Command
Posted by Danny Angus <da...@apache.org>.
> If you copy the files out of the proposals directory and inside the main
> directory and upgrade the needed files that are redundant with the main
> trunk, it will be full functional. (After that compile James as like
> without IMAP). Currently Ive tested with Outlook and Outlook Express
> with no bigger problems, so you can test all of the features.
Sascha,
If I compile James with IMAP will James be exactly the same in operation if
I don't enable IMAP, than James without IMAP compiled in?
If the answer is yes, and I can make it work with at least one IMAP client
then I'd be prepared to vote in favour of moving it back into the HEAD.
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
RE: [PATCH] IMAP - Append Command
Posted by Sascha Kulawik <sa...@kulawik.de>.
> > Eeenteresting. I'll take a look but I tried to build it 2 days ago
> > and I had a holy heck of a time getting it to build. the
> > build-imap.xml file seems to be expecting a drastically different
> > directory structure and locations than the HEAD.
>
> it pre-dates big changes that were made to upgrade phoenix.
The changes are done - and it was comitted on Tuesday.
> > I don't yet have time to sort this out but
> > my plan is this:
> >
> > 1. Get build-imap.xml and build-test.xml to work out of the
> box when
> > checking out the head -- submit this
>
> +1
The build-test.xml will be done by Stefan Schiessling, I'm not a
ANT-Wizard, so I havent changed the build-file for the IMAP trunk. But
is this needed, if IMAP will be in the Main trunk ?
> > 2. look into what it would take to move it into the head
> and submit that
> > ensuring its fully turn-offable
>
> Basically its not hard, its a conifg thing, but we *must* be
> able to deal with whatever the conflict in james.java is.
>
> I still don't think we'll be miving it back into the HEAD
> until its been shown to build *and* work, at least to some
> degree. (I can't get it to work)
If you copy the files out of the proposals directory and inside the main
directory and upgrade the needed files that are redundant with the main
trunk, it will be full functional. (After that compile James as like
without IMAP). Currently Ive tested with Outlook and Outlook Express
with no bigger problems, so you can test all of the features.
Sascha
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
RE: [PATCH] IMAP - Append Command
Posted by Danny Angus <da...@apache.org>.
> Eeenteresting. I'll take a look but I tried to build it 2 days ago and
> I had a holy heck of a time getting it to build. the build-imap.xml
> file seems to be expecting a drastically different directory structure
> and locations than the HEAD.
it pre-dates big changes that were made to upgrade phoenix.
> I don't yet have time to sort this out but
> my plan is this:
>
> 1. Get build-imap.xml and build-test.xml to work out of the box when
> checking out the head -- submit this
+1
>
> 2. look into what it would take to move it into the head and submit that
> ensuring its fully turn-offable
Basically its not hard, its a conifg thing, but we *must* be able to deal
with whatever the conflict in james.java is.
I still don't think we'll be miving it back into the HEAD until its been
shown to build *and* work, at least to some degree.
(I can't get it to work)
d.
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: [PATCH] IMAP - Append Command
Posted by "Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@apache.org>.
Eeenteresting. I'll take a look but I tried to build it 2 days ago and
I had a holy heck of a time getting it to build. the build-imap.xml
file seems to be expecting a drastically different directory structure
and locations than the HEAD. I don't yet have time to sort this out but
my plan is this:
1. Get build-imap.xml and build-test.xml to work out of the box when
checking out the head -- submit this
2. look into what it would take to move it into the head and submit that
ensuring its fully turn-offable
3. Get imap to work with Ximian Evolution and Mozilla.
a. create unit tests matching their general behavior - submit
b. get those unit tests to work - submit
What are your short term interests?
-Andy
>
> Thanks Andy,
>
> I've done the changes for the same dependencies, thats the changes Ive
> committed on Tuesday.
> So it would be possible to build IMAP with this changes.
> It's still needed, to change the Avalon-Configuration, but this won't
> affect if you will not use IMAP.
>
> Sascha
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
RE: [PATCH] IMAP - Append Command
Posted by Sascha Kulawik <sa...@kulawik.de>.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: news [mailto:news@main.gmane.org] On Behalf Of Andrew C. Oliver
> Sent: Saturday, August 31, 2002 1:38 PM
> To: james-dev@jakarta.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] IMAP - Append Command
>
>
> I think you're right and we're ready, but we need to get IMAP
> up to the
> same dependency tree as the head. It still won't build with it.
>
> -Andy
Thanks Andy,
I've done the changes for the same dependencies, thats the changes Ive
committed on Tuesday.
So it would be possible to build IMAP with this changes.
It's still needed, to change the Avalon-Configuration, but this won't
affect if you will not use IMAP.
Sascha
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: [PATCH] IMAP - Append Command
Posted by "Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@apache.org>.
I think you're right and we're ready, but we need to get IMAP up to the
same dependency tree as the head. It still won't build with it.
-Andy
Sascha Kulawik wrote:
>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: news [mailto:news@main.gmane.org] On Behalf Of Andrew C. Oliver
>>Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2002 2:40 PM
>>To: james-dev@jakarta.apache.org
>>Subject: Re: [PATCH] IMAP - Append Command
>>
>>
>>Personally, I think we should look for a way to componentize
>>JAMES far
>>enough to where building in IMAP is as simple as flicking a switch so
>>that there is no need for a divergent versions of things.
>
>
> It IS currently possible to switch imap off or on - compiled in the main
> trunk. So it also would be possible to let the IMAP-Trunk reside inside
> the Main-Trunk.
>
> Sascha
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
RE: [PATCH] IMAP - Append Command
Posted by Danny Angus <da...@apache.org>.
Thats the lines I was thinking along.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: news [mailto:news@main.gmane.org]On Behalf Of Andrew C. Oliver
> Sent: 28 August 2002 13:40
> To: james-dev@jakarta.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] IMAP - Append Command
>
>
> Personally, I think we should look for a way to componentize JAMES far
> enough to where building in IMAP is as simple as flicking a switch so
> that there is no need for a divergent versions of things.
>
> -Andy
>
> Danny Angus wrote:
> > Sascha,
> >
> > I'm happy to work with you to get these changes in, then to
> assess IMAP and
> > propose a vote if it appears to be half way stable,
> > but
> > 1/ please could you help me by making your patches conform to
> the guidelines
> > http://jakarta.apache.org/james/contribute.html
> > diff -u from the /proposals/imap dir, and zip new files from
> there too. Then
> > I don't have to work out paths, and go looking for files to patch.
> >
> > and
> > 2/ Perhaps if I add a task to the main build file that will
> build James with
> > IMAP that would be a reasonable interim before we put it back
> into the HEAD.
> >
> > d.
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail:
<ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
RE: [PATCH] IMAP - Append Command
Posted by Sascha Kulawik <sa...@kulawik.de>.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: news [mailto:news@main.gmane.org] On Behalf Of Andrew C. Oliver
> Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2002 2:40 PM
> To: james-dev@jakarta.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] IMAP - Append Command
>
>
> Personally, I think we should look for a way to componentize
> JAMES far
> enough to where building in IMAP is as simple as flicking a switch so
> that there is no need for a divergent versions of things.
It IS currently possible to switch imap off or on - compiled in the main
trunk. So it also would be possible to let the IMAP-Trunk reside inside
the Main-Trunk.
Sascha
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>