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 Robert Burrell Donkin <ro...@gmail.com> on 2008/03/06 20:13:05 UTC
[Mailets] Library Organisation
IMHO it would be best to organize mailet libraries as several
releasable products:
* a main library consisting of general mailets and helper code with
minimal dependencies (standard-mailets)
* a number of small specialist libraries (eg cryptographic-mailets)
which may depend on the main library
i think that this should make dependency management easier for users
and reduce the learning curve for developers
opinions?
- robert
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-dev-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: server-dev-help@james.apache.org
Re: [Mailets] Library Organisation
Posted by Robert Burrell Donkin <ro...@gmail.com>.
On Fri, Mar 7, 2008 at 11:53 AM, Stefano Bagnara <ap...@bago.org> wrote:
> Robert Burrell Donkin ha scritto:
<snip>
> > * a number of small specialist libraries (eg cryptographic-mailets)
> > which may depend on the main library
>
> I don't like to have too many packages so I would probably go for a
> single package for everything not included in the previous category.
> But I'm fine also with your proposal.
ATM the only product i can think of is crytography. there are definite
legal advantages for users in keeping cryptography dependencies
separate. so, IMO we need this category. best to discuss other mailets
on a case-by-case basis.
- robert
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-dev-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: server-dev-help@james.apache.org
Re: [Mailets] Library Organisation
Posted by Robert Burrell Donkin <ro...@gmail.com>.
On Fri, Mar 7, 2008 at 11:53 AM, Stefano Bagnara <ap...@bago.org> wrote:
> Robert Burrell Donkin ha scritto:
>
> > IMHO it would be best to organize mailet libraries as several
> > releasable products:
> > * a main library consisting of general mailets and helper code with
> > minimal dependencies (standard-mailets)
>
> +1
> maybe helper code could be separated into our mailet implementation
> package, but this is a good first step.
yeh: one step at a time
- robert
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-dev-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: server-dev-help@james.apache.org
Re: [Mailets] Library Organisation
Posted by Stefano Bagnara <ap...@bago.org>.
Robert Burrell Donkin ha scritto:
> IMHO it would be best to organize mailet libraries as several
> releasable products:
> * a main library consisting of general mailets and helper code with
> minimal dependencies (standard-mailets)
+1
maybe helper code could be separated into our mailet implementation
package, but this is a good first step.
> * a number of small specialist libraries (eg cryptographic-mailets)
> which may depend on the main library
I don't like to have too many packages so I would probably go for a
single package for everything not included in the previous category.
But I'm fine also with your proposal.
Stefano
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-dev-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: server-dev-help@james.apache.org