Hi. This is the qmail-send program at deliveredsolutions.co.uk. I'm afraid I wasn't able to deliver your message to the following addresses. This is a permanent error; I've given up. Sorry it didn't work out.
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: sh: line 1: clamdscan: command not found spamc: invalid option -- E vdeliver: Invalid or unknown virtual user 'sid.wood' --- Below this line is a copy of the message. Return-Path: <[email protected]> Received: (qmail 23393 invoked from network); 1 Mar 2006 23:52:42 -0000 Received: from b.mx.deliveredsolutions.co.uk (213.146.130.133) by dev0 with (DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA encrypted) SMTP; 1 Mar 2006 23:52:42 -0000 Received: (qmail 18140 invoked from network); 1 Mar 2006 23:01:17 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO DWS047.cflib.org) (199.231.128.19) by 0 with SMTP; 1 Mar 2006 23:01:17 -0000 Received: from cadmium.mailguard.com.au ([207.44.228.3]) by cflib.org with MailEnable ESMTP; Wed, 01 Mar 2006 18:58:06 -0500 Received: by cadmium.mailguard.com.au (Postfix) id 77E248C8046; Thu, 2 Mar 2006 10:52:49 +1100 (EST) Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2006 10:52:49 +1100 (EST) From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mail Delivery System) Subject: [CFCDev] Undelivered Mail Returned to Sender To: [email protected] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/report; report-type=delivery-status; boundary="42E638C8041.1141257169/cadmium.mailguard.com.au" Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [email protected] Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] This is a MIME-encapsulated message. --42E638C8041.1141257169/cadmium.mailguard.com.au Content-Description: Notification Content-Type: text/plain This is the Postfix program at host cadmium.mailguard.com.au. I'm sorry to have to inform you that your message could not be be delivered to one or more recipients. It's attached below. For further assistance, please send mail to <postmaster> If you do so, please include this problem report. You can delete your own text from the attached returned message. The Postfix program <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: host localhost.mailguard.com.au[127.0.0.1] said: 522 Recipient <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Permanent Failure Mailbox Status Mailbox full (in reply to end of DATA command) --42E638C8041.1141257169/cadmium.mailguard.com.au Content-Description: Delivery report Content-Type: message/delivery-status Reporting-MTA: dns; cadmium.mailguard.com.au X-Postfix-Queue-ID: 42E638C8041 X-Postfix-Sender: rfc822; [email protected] Arrival-Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2006 10:52:49 +1100 (EST) Final-Recipient: rfc822; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Action: failed Status: 5.0.0 Diagnostic-Code: X-Postfix; host localhost.mailguard.com.au[127.0.0.1] said: 522 Recipient <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Permanent Failure Mailbox Status Mailbox full (in reply to end of DATA command) --42E638C8041.1141257169/cadmium.mailguard.com.au Content-Description: Undelivered Message Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Received: from palladium.mailguard.com.au (palladium.mailguard.com.au [70.84.109.196]) by cadmium.mailguard.com.au (Postfix) with ESMTP id 42E638C8041 for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Thu, 2 Mar 2006 10:52:49 +1100 (EST) Received: from protactinium.mailguard.com.au (protactinium.mailguard.com.au [70.86.22.2]) by palladium.mailguard.com.au (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2439748084; Thu, 2 Mar 2006 10:52:49 +1100 (EST) Received: from localhost (protactinium.mailguard.com.au [127.0.0.1]) by protactinium.mailguard.com.au (Postfix) with ESMTP id E6CBC79694C; Thu, 2 Mar 2006 10:52:48 +1100 (EST) Received-SPF: none (protactinium.mailguard.com.au: 199.231.128.19 is neither permitted nor denied by domain of cfczone.org) client-ip=199.231.128.19; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; helo=DWS047.cflib.org; Received: from DWS047.cflib.org (unknown [199.231.128.19]) by protactinium.mailguard.com.au (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B0BC795D44 for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Thu, 2 Mar 2006 10:50:55 +1100 (EST) Received: from sweep.lonelyplanet.com.au ([202.147.44.192]) by cflib.org with MailEnable ESMTP; Wed, 01 Mar 2006 18:52:01 -0500 Received: from Garuda.lpint.net ([192.168.61.88]) by sweep.lonelyplanet.com.au with InterScan Messaging Security Suite; Thu, 02 Mar 2006 10:51:57 +1100 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [email protected] Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2006 10:46:39 +1100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/report; report-type=delivery-status; boundary="9B095B5ADSN=_01C63A6FB1EA578600018B4CGaruda.lpint.net" X-DSNContext: 335a7efd - 4523 - 00000001 - 80040546 Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [CFCDev] Delivery Status Notification (Failure) X-imss-version: 2.038 X-imss-result: Passed X-imss-approveListMatch: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Precedence: bulk Reply-To: [email protected] Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-SpamGuard-Score: 1.538 X-MailGuard-ID: 440633ac1d2c97 X-Filtered: by MailGuard - visit http://www.mailguard.com.au This is a MIME-formatted message. Portions of this message may be unreadable without a MIME-capable mail program. --9B095B5ADSN=_01C63A6FB1EA578600018B4CGaruda.lpint.net Content-Type: text/plain; charset=unicode-1-1-utf-7 This is an automatically generated Delivery Status Notification. Delivery to the following recipients failed. [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---------------------------------------------------------- You are subscribed to cfcdev. To unsubscribe, send an email to [email protected] with the words 'unsubscribe cfcdev' as the subject of the email. CFCDev is run by CFCZone (www.cfczone.org) and supported by CFXHosting (www.cfxhosting.com). An archive of the CFCDev list is available at www.mail-archive.com/[email protected] --9B095B5ADSN=_01C63A6FB1EA578600018B4CGaruda.lpint.net Content-Type: message/delivery-status Reporting-MTA: dns;Garuda.lpint.net Received-From-MTA: dns;sweep.lonelyplanet.com.au Arrival-Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2006 10:46:39 +1100 Final-Recipient: rfc822;[EMAIL PROTECTED] Action: failed Status: 5.1.1 --9B095B5ADSN=_01C63A6FB1EA578600018B4CGaruda.lpint.net Content-Type: message/rfc822 Received: from sweep.lonelyplanet.com.au ([192.168.61.82]) by Garuda.lpint.net with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Thu, 2 Mar 2006 10:46:39 +1100 Received: from DWS047.cflib.org ([199.231.128.19]) by sweep.lonelyplanet.com.au with InterScan Messaging Security Suite; Thu, 02 Mar 2006 10:51:55 +1100 Received: from blmail01bos.io.askjeeves.info ([65.214.39.154]) by cflib.org with MailEnable ESMTP; Wed, 01 Mar 2006 18:51:45 -0500 Received: (qmail 7441 invoked by alias); 1 Mar 2006 23:46:28 -0000 Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: 1 Mar 2006 23:46:28 -0000 From: Bloglines Bounce <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [email protected] Subject: [CFCDev] Error Precedence: bulk MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [email protected] Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-OriginalArrivalTime: 01 Mar 2006 23:46:39.0368 (UTC) FILETIME=[627B8080:01C63D8A] X-TM-AS-Product-Ver: SMEX-7.0.0.1433-3.52.1006-14298.000 X-TM-AS-Result: No--7.440000-8.000000-31 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hello, There has been an error processing your email. The error is: This email was sent to an invalid address. For the correct email=20 address to submit emails, please visit http://www.bloglines.com and=20 view the My Blogs page. Your request has not been processed. Below is a copy of your original email. The email was originally sent to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] The Bloglines Team -- Original Message: Received: (qmail 7431 invoked from network); 1 Mar 2006 23:46:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO DWS047.cflib.org) (199.231.128.19) by 0 with SMTP; 1 Mar 2006 23:46:27 -0000 Received: from smtp03.safesecureweb.com ([65.36.154.50]) by cflib.org wit= h MailEnable ESMTP; Wed, 01 Mar 2006 15:51:36 -0500 Received: from mail14.safesecureweb.com (unknown [192.168.2.135]) by smtp03.safesecureweb.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id EA57C2F5F62 for <[email protected]>; Wed, 1 Mar 2006 15:46:18 -0500 (EST) Received: from 68-67-253-41.frdrmd.adelphia.net [68.67.253.41] by mail14.= safesecureweb.com with SMTP; Wed, 1 Mar 2006 15:52:20 -0500 Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2006 15:45:33 -0500 From: Jason Daiger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [email protected] User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5 (Windows/20051201) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [CFCDev] DAO vs. Gateway? References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <000201c63c12$c17de8d0$6401a8= [EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=3D"------------040408040403080403020008" X-Virus-Scanned: by Barracuda Spam Firewall at safesecureweb.com Precedence: bulk Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------040408040403080403020008 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3DISO-8859-1; format=3Dflowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit My .02 on the DAO's getting huge is the same response given when Model=20 Glue folks that complain the configuration file that is too long. Use a=20 good editor and you probably won't even notice the size. For me=20 managing 2 small files is a bigger pain than 1 large file. Also, I'm=20 not making any comments on the editor folks are using (obviously since I=20 have no idea what people are using) but I've found the code collapse=20 w/in Eclipse eliminates the big file concern for me. Thus I'm left with=20 the 'keep track of 1 or 2 files' issue and I simply choose 1 approach. =20 I have yet to hear of a design reason why the 2 file approach is better=20 or why a 1 file approach would break the design pattern both approaches=20 strive to achieve. In the end, it seems like personal preference. Now=20 if someone tells me the 1file approach breaks down because of X or=20 breaks a design pattern b/c of Y then I'm all ears. Until then, it's 1=20 file for me. Peter J. Farrell wrote: > Kurt Wiersma said the following on 3/1/2006 12:52 PM: > =20 >> Like Chris Scott, I have found that the Java convention seems to be >> having all the code in a DAO class. In my CF apps I have found I >> really like having the gateway separate because in Java I have found >> my DAOs get huge with all the different methods that sometimes have to >> be added for reporting purposes. >> >> --Kurt >> =20 > Ditto! Although I don't do any Java developing, I have found that DAO > classes with everything gets unwieldy after a bit of time. Also, I lik= e > the idea of having my DAO access single records, while the Gateway is > one or more. Secondly, typically my DAOs return populated beans while > the Gateways returns cf query objects. > > .Peter > > =20 --=20 Jason Daiger URL: www.jdaiger.com EML: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---------------------------------------------------------- You are subscribed to cfcdev. To unsubscribe, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] zone.org with the words 'unsubscribe cfcdev' as the subject of the email. CFCDev is run by CFCZone (www.cfczone.org) and supported by CFXHosting (w= ww.cfxhosting.com). An archive of the CFCDev list is available at www.mail-archive.com/cfcdev= @cfczone.org --------------040408040403080403020008 Content-Type: text/html; charset=3DISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"> <html> <head> <meta content=3D"text/html;charset=3DISO-8859-1" http-equiv=3D"Content-= Type"> <title></title> </head> <body bgcolor=3D"#ffffff" text=3D"#000000"> My .02 on the DAO's getting huge is the same response given when Model Glue folks that complain the configuration file that is too long. Use a good editor and you probably won't even notice the size. For me managing 2 small files is a bigger pain than 1 large file. Also, I'= m not making any comments on the editor folks are using (obviously since I have no idea what people are using) but I've found the code collapse w/in Eclipse eliminates the big file concern for me. Thus I'm left with the 'keep track of 1 or 2 files' issue and I simply choose 1 approach.&nb= sp; I have yet to hear of a design reason why the 2 file approach is better or why a 1 file approach would break the design pattern both approaches strive to achieve. In the end, it seems like personal preference.&n= bsp; Now if someone tells me the 1file approach breaks down because of X or breaks a design pattern b/c of Y then I'm all ears. Until then, it'= s 1 file for me.<br> <br> <br> <br> Peter J. Farrell wrote: <blockquote cite=3D"[EMAIL PROTECTED]" type=3D"ci= te"> <pre wrap=3D"">Kurt Wiersma said the following on 3/1/2006 12:52 PM: </pre> <blockquote type=3D"cite"> <pre wrap=3D"">Like Chris Scott, I have found that the Java conventio= n seems to be having all the code in a DAO class. In my CF apps I have found I really like having the gateway separate because in Java I have found my DAOs get huge with all the different methods that sometimes have to be added for reporting purposes. --Kurt </pre> </blockquote> <pre wrap=3D""><!---->Ditto! Although I don't do any Java developing, = I have found that DAO classes with everything gets unwieldy after a bit of time. Also, I like the idea of having my DAO access single records, while the Gateway is one or more. Secondly, typically my DAOs return populated beans while the Gateways returns cf query objects. .Peter </pre> </blockquote> <br> <pre class=3D"moz-signature" cols=3D"72">--=20 Jason Daiger URL: <a class=3D"moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href=3D"http://www.jdaiger.com= ">www.jdaiger.com</a> EML: <a class=3D"moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href=3D"mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] om">[EMAIL PROTECTED]</a></pre> </body> </html> ----------------------------------------------------------<BR>You are sub= scribed to cfcdev. To unsubscribe, send an email to [email protected] wi= th the words 'unsubscribe cfcdev' as the subject of the email.<BR><BR>CFC= Dev is run by CFCZone (www.cfczone.org) and supported by CFXHosting (www.= cfxhosting.com).<BR><BR>An archive of the CFCDev list is available at www= .mail-archive.com/[email protected] --------------040408040403080403020008-- ---------------------------------------------------------- You are subscribed to cfcdev. To unsubscribe, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] zone.org with the words 'unsubscribe cfcdev' as the subject of the email. CFCDev is run by CFCZone (www.cfczone.org) and supported by CFXHosting (w= ww.cfxhosting.com). An archive of the CFCDev list is available at www.mail-archive.com/cfcdev= @cfczone.org --9B095B5ADSN=_01C63A6FB1EA578600018B4CGaruda.lpint.net-- --42E638C8041.1141257169/cadmium.mailguard.com.au-- ---------------------------------------------------------- You are subscribed to cfcdev. To unsubscribe, send an email to [email protected] with the words 'unsubscribe cfcdev' as the subject of the email. CFCDev is run by CFCZone (www.cfczone.org) and supported by CFXHosting (www.cfxhosting.com). An archive of the CFCDev list is available at www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]
