Stefano,
I think this may be a bug, I suspect that if anything else changed the
recipients between "store" and the actual write, that data would be
lost.
Given that mailets are multi threaded I suspect that this could
happen, resulting in mail being "lost" by some recipients and double
copies to others.
Hmm, I'll see if I can *make* it happen.
d.
On 5/31/05, Stefano Bagnara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I see that RemoteDelivery does this:
>
> String name = mail.getName();
> for (Iterator i = targets.keySet().iterator(); i.hasNext(); ) {
> String host = (String) i.next();
> Collection rec = (Collection) targets.get(host);
> if (isDebug) {
> StringBuffer logMessageBuffer =
> new StringBuffer(128)
> .append("Sending mail to ")
> .append(rec)
> .append(" on host ")
> .append(host);
> log(logMessageBuffer.toString());
> }
> mail.setRecipients(rec);
> StringBuffer nameBuffer =
> new StringBuffer(128)
> .append(name)
> .append("-to-")
> .append(host);
> mail.setName(nameBuffer.toString());
> outgoing.store(mail);
> }
>
> Please note that at every iteration the same "mail" instance is changed and
> stored in the repository with a new name.
>
> Is this a supported way to handle Mailets Mail objects? Wouldn't be more
> correct to clone the original mail at each iteration, assigning the new name
> in the duplicate method and setting its recipients before storing it?
>
> Currently it works fine because RemoteDelivery does not support passthrough
> and because we use the setName that is not and should not be available via
> Mail interface.
>
> We should pay attention to this issues when talking about the new mailet
> API.
>
> Stefano
>
>
