Re: cyrus 2.2 status

2002-12-21 Thread Amos Gouaux
On Tue, 17 Dec 2002 20:28:57 -0600, archive info-cyrus [EMAIL PROTECTED] (ai) writes: ai --On Tuesday, December 17, 2002 4:24 PM -0800 Jonathan Marsden ai [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ai | So the question becomes: what, if anything can non-CMU people do that ai | would help cause a release of

Re: cyrus 2.2 status

2002-12-18 Thread Ken Murchison
Jonathan Marsden wrote: On 13 Dec 2002, Jure Pecar writes: On Thu, 12 Dec 2002 20:31:41 -0500 Ken Murchison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I addition to what Rob already mentioned, there needs to be more work done on documenting the virtdomain support and tying some loose ends. Yes,

Re: cyrus 2.2 status

2002-12-18 Thread Rob Siemborski
On Wed, 18 Dec 2002, Ken Murchison wrote: Its not a matter of CMU needing/using virtdomain support. CMU is not using altnamespace or unixhiersep stuff in 2.1, and that was released. Well, yes, but we did have an interest in moving to SASL2. Though I still agree that what we run internally

Re: cyrus 2.2 status

2002-12-17 Thread Jonathan Marsden
On 13 Dec 2002, Jure Pecar writes: On Thu, 12 Dec 2002 20:31:41 -0500 Ken Murchison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I addition to what Rob already mentioned, there needs to be more work done on documenting the virtdomain support and tying some loose ends. Yes, virtdomains are actually the #1

Re: cyrus 2.2 status

2002-12-13 Thread Jure Pecar
On Thu, 12 Dec 2002 20:31:41 -0500 Ken Murchison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I addition to what Rob already mentioned, there needs to be more work done on documenting the virtdomain support and tying some loose ends. Yes, virtdomains are actually the #1 thing i'm interested in cyrus 2.2 ... I'm

Re: cyrus 2.2 status

2002-12-13 Thread Rob Siemborski
On Thu, 12 Dec 2002, John Alton Tamplin wrote: Well, most real databases offer online backup capability so you can get a robust backup even while processing transactions, and with continuous log backup a crash can't lose any committed transactions. But unless the contents of the folders are

Re: cyrus 2.2 status

2002-12-13 Thread John Alton Tamplin
Rob Siemborski wrote: But unless the contents of the folders are backed up in this way too, you haven't really gained a significant amount, since the transactions that cyrus needs to make rely on the contents of the filesystem as well. True, although with the metadata secure you can politely

Re: cyrus 2.2 status (fwd)

2002-12-13 Thread Igor Brezac
On Fri, 13 Dec 2002, John Alton Tamplin wrote: Rob Siemborski wrote: But unless the contents of the folders are backed up in this way too, you haven't really gained a significant amount, since the transactions that cyrus needs to make rely on the contents of the filesystem as well.

cyrus 2.2 status

2002-12-12 Thread Jure Pecar
Hi all, what is the current status of the cyrus 2.2 cvs branch? judging by the cvs commits lately, there are just various little cleanups here and there ... is there anything big left on the TODO list for 2.2? my little wish would be the sql cyrusdb interface, discussed here a week or two ago,

Re: cyrus 2.2 status

2002-12-12 Thread Rob Siemborski
On Thu, 12 Dec 2002, Jure Pecar wrote: what is the current status of the cyrus 2.2 cvs branch? judging by the cvs commits lately, there are just various little cleanups here and there ... is there anything big left on the TODO list for 2.2? The big one is getting the sieve bytecode support

Re: cyrus 2.2 status

2002-12-12 Thread Ken Murchison
Jure Pecar wrote: Hi all, what is the current status of the cyrus 2.2 cvs branch? judging by the cvs commits lately, there are just various little cleanups here and there ... is there anything big left on the TODO list for 2.2? I addition to what Rob already mentioned, there needs to be