Re: [RTC] Vote restart on 2 javamail patches
+1 I looked at them Rick and they look fine. I'm not a javamail guy so I can't comment on that aspect. Applied and built. Rick McGuire wrote: These two patches have been sitting in [RTC] state for 2 weeks now with no activity. The only votes received so far have been non-binding ones. These changes are holding up other work, including trying to convince the James developers to convert to using the Geronimo javamail version. First issue, removing the javamail-transport module and replacing it with a dependency on the javamail-provider jar. http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-2147 NOTE: The above patch is another example of an area where svn diff and patch don't work well together. Applying this patch will prompt for a Reverse action on the patch. It doesn't matter how you reply, because after the patch applies, delete the javamail-transport module subdirectory, and this should build ok. Second issue, creating a new javamail 1.4 spec jar. http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-2148 Rick
Re: [RTC] Vote restart on 2 javamail patches
Rick, I have reviewed your patches and they appear fine to me. You get my +1. Jeff Rick McGuire wrote: These two patches have been sitting in [RTC] state for 2 weeks now with no activity. The only votes received so far have been non-binding ones. These changes are holding up other work, including trying to convince the James developers to convert to using the Geronimo javamail version. First issue, removing the javamail-transport module and replacing it with a dependency on the javamail-provider jar. http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-2147 NOTE: The above patch is another example of an area where svn diff and patch don't work well together. Applying this patch will prompt for a Reverse action on the patch. It doesn't matter how you reply, because after the patch applies, delete the javamail-transport module subdirectory, and this should build ok. Second issue, creating a new javamail 1.4 spec jar. http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-2148 Rick
[RTC] Vote restart on 2 javamail patches
These two patches have been sitting in [RTC] state for 2 weeks now with no activity. The only votes received so far have been non-binding ones. These changes are holding up other work, including trying to convince the James developers to convert to using the Geronimo javamail version. First issue, removing the javamail-transport module and replacing it with a dependency on the javamail-provider jar. http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-2147 NOTE: The above patch is another example of an area where svn diff and patch don't work well together. Applying this patch will prompt for a Reverse action on the patch. It doesn't matter how you reply, because after the patch applies, delete the javamail-transport module subdirectory, and this should build ok. Second issue, creating a new javamail 1.4 spec jar. http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-2148 Rick
javamail patches
Bruce, I submitted several patches for the javamail spec code earlier this week (1527, 1528, 1530). I'm got a dependency on those patches to complete the SMTP authentication stuff, and I believe these patches will also help with the POP3 and IMAP work. Could you possible review these and get them committed? Rick
Re: javamail patches
I would think both my patch and Ricks patches would have no impact on each other as I have not touched anything beyond POP3. However my code could benifit from Ricks work on some of the authentication mechanisms :) But still, Rick if u tried out my stuff, I would love to hear from you.!!! But my guess is that we haven't impacted each others code base. Regards, Rajith. On 1/27/06, Bruce Snyder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 1/27/06, Rick McGuire [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I submitted several patches for the javamail spec code earlier this week (1527, 1528, 1530).I'm got a dependency on those patches to complete the SMTP authentication stuff, and I believe these patches will also help with the POP3 and IMAP work.Could you possible review these and get them committed?Sure, no problem, Rick. Like I said in response to Rajith, I've beenunder water until this week so I may have missed some things, so, myapologies. I'll look into this stuff right away. One question though, had you already been working with Rajith's patch in your localenvironment? IOW, are the patches attached to 1527, 1528 and 1530aware of Rajith's patch?Bruce--perl -e 'print unpack(u30,D0G)[EMAIL PROTECTED]5R\F)R=6-E+G-N61ED\!G;6%I;\YC;VT* );'Apache Geronimo (http://geronimo.apache.org/)Castor (http://castor.org/)
