Your're right, Through the imports it's necessary to put the tree out from the proposals. The new parameter was already used in the old James 2.03a Version (am I right ?) - and it has no effect (see the diff) if it's missing - then the normal Store-Methods are used.
Greetings, Sascha > -----Original Message----- > From: Peter M. Goldstein [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Saturday, July 27, 2002 11:19 PM > To: 'James Developers List' > Subject: RE: [PATCH] Diff for James.java to use (or use not) IMAP > > > > > Sascha, > > > > A couple of quick comments. > > > > 1) Any change of this nature will require that the > org.apache.james.imapserver.* Java files currently in the > proposal directory be shifted to the main directory. What is > the status of those files? If we don't do this, then the > build will break and everyone will get grumpy. > > 2) The change as proposed requires a new configuration > parameter. > First, a new required parameter is probably not desirable or > necessary. This sort of change should have the minimum impact > on currently deployed users. So the parameter should > probably be optional, with behavior defaulting to the > non-IMAP behavior. > > > > --Peter > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Sascha Kulawik [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Saturday, July 27, 2002 11:13 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: [PATCH] Diff for James.java to use (or use not) IMAP > > > > <<James_IMAP.diff>> > Here are the changes for the Main James.java File. > It would be great, if this could be commited, because of > possible updates of this file outside the IMAP development. > The Version of James.java in the proposals/imap dir wasn't > new enough to use, so thisone could be used without the rest > of the IMAP Sources and - of course - with the IMAP Sources. > > Greetings, > Sascha > >
