+1, although I'm hoping to make an alpha release this week, so I'm not sure
what the timing should be.
Serge Knystautas
Loki Technologies
http://www.lokitech.com/
----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Hammant" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2001 6:46 PM
Subject: Re: dnsjava block
> Serge,
>
> Simply I am just talking about moving the dns wrapper to cornerstone
> from james. I'm keen for it not to fork... i.e. the James team see the
> move, and use it from cornerstone from then on. That's what the vote is
> about - block to move or not to move from james CVS.
>
> As a second issue a JNDI dns lookup mechanism was seen to be more
> desirable in the long run to the James team. My suggestion was, if that
> was to happen, for it to honour the "Service" interface that the
> original dnsjava block did.
>
> - Paul H
>
> >Paul,
> >
> >I think I'm missing the goal of these suggestions...
> >
> >>Serge,
> >>
> >>>We could... I think the dnsjava has features as a complete DNS server
if
> >>>
> >you
> >
> >>>want. This sounds like a potentially cool block for Avalon, but
probably
> >>>unrelated to James.
> >>>
> >>Could you folks have a vote then on this? I propose it's move to
> >>jakarta-avalon-cornerstone/apps/dnsserver/ (see ftpserver at same
level).
> >>
> >
> >I don't know what authority the James project has to vote on this...
someone
> >has to write code to create a DNS server, and then whoever does that
could
> >decide what to do with that code.
> >
> >>>James is only using it for a DNS API to lookup MX
> >>>records, and we might even remove the dnsjava dependency and go with
the
> >>>JNDI DNS implementation at some point.
> >>>
> >>Of course, the two would share the same service interface. An assembler
> >>could configure James to use either dns implementing block ....?
> >>
> >
> >Again I think I'm missing what your plans are. If it's what I
understand, I
> >don't see the need to further abstract the code before a second
> >implementation is written... it's really a pretty minor part of the
system,
> >and I don't see a need to support multiple implementations.
> >
> >Serge Knystautas
> >Loki Technologies
> >http://www.lokitech.com/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
