> I'll admit, I think turning James into a "messaging" platform is like > saying we should change Apache HTTPD into a "stateless connection" > platform. The more you generalize, the less functionality you can > provide. If the community/industry picks a protocol and goes with it, > then everyone benefits.
I agree with this, but on the other hand if we can add protocols to James because people are prepared to put in the leg work required to see their "protocol du jour" on the menu then I don't see what the probelm would be. The Avalon-ish-ness of James allows serious users to properly enable and disable whatever protocols they want, and the use of the "enabled" attribute allows less concerned users to simply not start those services which aren't required. d. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
