> My impression what I look at James from the Merlin perspective is that
> James is actualy made up of a number of reusable components
Yes. However, from a deployment perspective, users don't want to download
and install a server like they are ordering from a Chinese menu. Peter and
I have discussed this off-line. I believe that our consensus of two is that
we put out a stable release (RELEASE build) of James 2.1 that is intended
for users, and start to put out a series of MILESTONE builds with IMAP and
other new functionality. We should also get the nightly build process
fixed.
> I want to be able to totally replace the user storage system
> with my own internal framework
We should revisit the entire data model for user and message repositories.
> At least get the javadoc complete.
javadocs are for developers. I view 2.1 as a RELEASE build for users. Yes,
we need to work on the javadocs, but I would not wait for them before
putting out a stable release build if we can do so.
> migration from ComponentManager to ServiceManager to about 2 days.
There are other changes in the patch set, changing how the server components
use sockets. I haven't looked at the code (Peter has), but although they
are highly desireable changes, they are significant. But hey, we did pretty
well on the spooler changes (minus that little locking glitch).
--- Noel
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
