On Thu, 27 Sep 2001 Steve Loughran wrote :
> >3836, IMHO is actually a bug - a harcoded port, I
> >consider, is equivalent to a hardcoded host ;-)
> As far as my metrics are concerned, If we documented
> that you could specify a port, and it didnt work, then
> it would be a bug. Otherwise its an enhancement
> request, one which needs to go in to
Yes, I agree with your distinction of a bug and a ER.
> >3024 may be addressed later as I agree it is an
> >enhancement.
> I thought we had obviated the need for this with the
> MimeMail task becoming part of the optional package in
> 1.4. What is your need for separated attachments in
> the Mail task which can't be satisfied by the MimeMail
> tak?
Yes, MimeMail will address my need, but that doesn't
mean this task has to stay the way it is. Look at it
this way: Make does a poor job of compiling java code.
Ant does a better job of it. That doesn't mean that make
shouldn't be improved. If MimeMail is seen as the
'replacement' for Mail, then deprecating Mail would
be a good way to go, but others have expressed
concerns about it. Anyway, this doesn't break existing
things in any way. Yes, it is an ER too and can be
'considered' later on.
> The faster we get 1.4.1 out the door, the faster we
> can get 1.5 out the door, which is where enhancements
> and less critical bug fixes should go.
>
> -steve
The patches are there. It is up to you all to decide
what needs to go into this release and the next. I am
not pushing for this or that. I just wanted to bring
them all to your attention, which I have done.
Thanks,
Magesh
