Steve Loughran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > From: "Stefan Bodewig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> This means, it uses JavaMail instead of org.apache.tools.mail, yes? > > yes indeed. So while it does more, its requirements are higher. Hmm, random thought alarm: Make <mail> a facade that uses JavaMail if present and falls back to a non MIME version based on Jason's simple mail package that ships with Ant. >> Any reason you need the complete J2EE stuff instead of JavaMail and >> Java Activation Framework separately? > > nope. I didnt know they came in separate jars. If someone sends me > the pointers I'll make the build of the file dependent on them and > do a doc page to go with it. JavaMail: <http://java.sun.com/products/javamail/index.html> Java Activation Framework: <http://java.sun.com/products/javabeans/glasgow/jaf.html> > Also we need to consider whether the file selection process (comma > separated list) is adequate. I'd always prefer something using nested elements over (arbitrarily) seperated lists in attributes. > I'd rather a proper fileset list, maybe with manual mime type > override. This could be a fileset with some additional features, like <zipfileset> or <tarfileset>. Stefan
