Sure, if the repository already does indexing, then we don't need Lucene for that repository. That said, we're a LONG way from needing to address this issue and I haven't looked as to how the current repository code works in the IMAP proposal, so this is all rather theoretical. -- Serge Knystautas Loki Technologies - Unstoppable Websites http://www.lokitech.com/
Chaudhuri, Hiran wrote: > Hi, Serge. > > Currently Tamino is not aware of the mime format. But as I said, the current > implementation is not very sophisticated. The message gets split into > envelope, headers and body, and those are sent as text to Tamino. > > Though I plan to descend on granularity, which means all headers get their > own tag, and attachements will be mime-decoded and stored as nonXML data. > > At that point, Tamino is fully aware of the content. We can have standard > indexes on headers, while the message body (in multipart messages every > single part) can have it's text index. > > As soon as I have that running, it would not make any sense to use Lucene in > my configuration. > > Hiran > > ----------------------------------------- > Hiran Chaudhuri > SAG Systemhaus GmbH > Elsenheimerstra?e 11 > 80687 Munchen > Germany > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Phone +49-89-54742-134 > Fax +49-6151-9234-5134 > > >>-----Original Message----- >>From: Serge Knystautas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >>Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 1:24 PM >>To: James Developers List >>Subject: Re: IMAP status? >> >> >>Hiran, >> >>Well, is Tamino aware of the mime format? I assume that even if a >>repository has indexing services, it won't know how to break >>apart the >>message and have the different search terms work against the >>appropriate >>parts of the message. >> >>I'm not exactly sure how the interface would work, but I was >>thinking it >>would be an extension or in addition to the current >>MailRepository. I >>would like to continue to have a db, file, tamino, filemem, >>or whatever >>repository on the backend. Figuring out the inheritance issue isn't >>going to be fun, so I have to think through some design >>patterns to see >>how to best reuse the repository code we already have. >>-- >>Serge Knystautas >>Loki Technologies - Unstoppable Websites >>http://www.lokitech.com/ >> >>Chaudhuri, Hiran wrote: >> >>>Hi Serge. >>> >>>You again? >>> >>>It was some indexing and retrieval reason that made me >> >>create the Tamino >> >>>mail repository. With the XML database in the back, a >> >>search on mails/news >> >>>can be done easily and fast. >>> >>>I believe such functionality should not be implemented in >> >>James but the >> >>>different repositories by themselves, and the >> >>MailRepository interface >> >>>should privide a way to access this implementation. That way you can >>>integrate Lucene for indexing but still allow other implementations. >>> >>>What I also might find useful is a SearchableRepository, which just >>>implements some indexing/retrieval (maybe with Lucene) and >> >>actually stores >> >>>the messages to another repository. This way it can be >> >>applied to any other >> >>>repository implementation (same as I suggested for the >> >>caching repository). >> >>>I somehow love the way Avalon plugs the components together...... >>> >>>Hiran >>> >>>----------------------------------------- >>>Hiran Chaudhuri >>>SAG Systemhaus GmbH >>>Elsenheimerstra?e 11 >>>80687 Munchen >>>Germany >>>[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>Phone +49-89-54742-134 >>>Fax +49-6151-9234-5134 >>> >>> >>> >>>>-----Original Message----- >>>>From: Serge Knystautas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >>>>Sent: Sunday, May 05, 2002 1:35 PM >>>>To: James Developers List >>>>Subject: Re: IMAP status? >>>> >>>> >>>>Thanks Darrell. I haven't had as much time this weekend as >>>>I'd hoped, >>>>but I do hope to at least start looking into things. As for the >>>>FETCH/SEARCH functionality, I was thinking about using Lucene to do >>>>automatic indexing of the appropriate parts of messages... >>>>had you given >>>>much thought to the search stuff yet? I'm fine droping the >>> >>ACL stuff >> >>>>for now... I'd rather get a version 1.0 out, and hope that we can >>>>refactor that when we have something workable that will >>> >>attract more >> >>>>developer interest. >>>> >>>>Hopefully later today I'll get a chance to get into the code >>>>and prepare >>>>some questions and/or lay out what I think I can start working on. >>>>-- >>>>Serge Knystautas >>>>Loki Technologies - Unstoppable Websites >>>>http://www.lokitech.com/ >>>> >>>>Darrell DeBoer wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>>On Fri, 3 May 2002 07:13, Serge Knystautas wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>Does anybody know the status of the IMAP code? After >>>>> >>going over the >> >>>>>>Avalon upgrade changes this weekend, I was hoping to try >>>>> >>to get into >> >>>>>>that code but wasn't sure if the code is in any way >>>>> >>>>testable. Anyone >>>> >>>> >>>>>>tried it lately? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>Hi Serge, >>>>> >>>>>I'm pretty sure I was the last one to delve in there.... >>>> >>>>Unfortunately (for >>>> >>>> >>>>>the IMAP proposal, anyway), I've been sidetracked working >>>> >>>>on the Myrmidon >>>> >>>> >>>>>Ant2 proposal, which is taking up all of my Jakarta time presently. >>>>> >>>>>When I finished up, I'd done some heavy refactoring of the >>>> >>>>command processing >>>> >>>> >>>>>design, to break it down into separate classes for each >>>> >>>>command. I'd also >>>> >>>> >>>>>simplified things a bunch by ignoring the ACL stuff, and >>>> >>>>changing the way the >>>> >>>> >>>>>namespaces map to the set of mailboxes. This was based on >>>> >>>>my interpretaion of >>>> >>>> >>>>>the RFC, but is a bit different to the way Charles had it >>>> >>>>working - I can >>>> >>>> >>>>>furnish more details if you like. >>>>> >>>>>I wrote some tests, and had a bunch of commands >>>> >>>>functioning, including LIST, >>>> >>>> >>>>>CREATE, DELETE and a couple of others. FETCH was the next >>>> >>>>thing to get >>>> >>>> >>>>>working, IIRC. >>>>> >>>>>To be honest, if you've got some time to dive in and start >>>> >>>>working on it, I >>>> >>>> >>>>>think I might find a little time to join you. It's just >>>> >>>>that I have little >>>> >>>> >>>>>need for an IMAP server myself, and with no-one else >>>> >>>>working on it to keep me >>>> >>>> >>>>>interested, I sort of let it slip... -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
