Noel J. Bergman (JIRA) wrote:
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JAMES-424?page=comments#action_12434868 ]
Noel J. Bergman commented on JAMES-424:
---
as you keep saying this is a problem in Javamail (and I could agree)
Keep it in
Author: bago
Date: Fri Sep 15 01:17:50 2006
New Revision: 446544
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revrev=446544
Log:
Translate an italian comment in OnlyText (left by mistake)
Modified:
james/server/trunk/src/java/org/apache/james/transport/mailets/OnlyText.java
Modified:
Author: bago
Date: Fri Sep 15 01:19:40 2006
New Revision: 446545
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revrev=446545
Log:
Moved POP3Handler.stat() method from the Handler to the RsetCmdHandler
Modified:
james/server/trunk/src/java/org/apache/james/pop3server/POP3Handler.java
JAMES Nightly Build System wrote:
---
Updating From Source Control
---
Reverted 'src/java/org/apache/james/transport/mailets/UnwrapText.java'
Reverted
+1
bye
Norman
Stefano Bagnara schrieb:
We already removed a few genirc James project docs from the server
source tree. Now I would like to remove something more and create a
server-site project to mantain all of the site-related things from
the server product.
We could even simply move
Stefano Bagnara wrote:
Vincenzo Gianferrari Pini wrote:
Yes, but we already used a different scheme for 2.1, 2.2 and 2.3..
so why change it for 2.4?
Because IMHO it was wrong :-) .
Ok, What I'm trying to say that consistency helps understanding: if
you change the rules in the middle
Vincenzo Gianferrari Pini wrote:
I think that you can create a new version in jira and call it
next-minor and make a list of things you want to merge back in this
release. I hope it is fine for you if I won't work on this branch and
to agree that this release should not block trunk development
Hi to all Developers,
I have been following this thread for some time now. Being a Person
that is only watching, I came to the conclusion that You as Developers
have a totally different understanding as of what should be a 2.4
Release.
Right now you are quarreling about things that should be
On 9/14/06, Norman Maurer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Vincenzo Gianferrari Pini schrieb:
I think that we have different goals and views about what is a minor
release, and how it should be reflected in the naming (numbering) scheme.
For me (and as I understand also for Noel) a James x.(y+1)
On 9/14/06, Noel J. Bergman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I will read and reply to the various comments later, but I want to put some
figures into the picture.
$ du -hs branches/v2.3/src/java trunk/src/java
13M branches/v2.3/src/java
15M trunk/src/java
$ svn
diff
On 9/15/06, Vincenzo Gianferrari Pini
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Stefano Bagnara wrote:
Vincenzo Gianferrari Pini wrote:
It's more than one year that I write to this list, you should have
learned that my discussion are a little rude. Don't take it so hard.
Ok :-) . But we italians
Bernd Fondermann wrote:
For me its:
2.3.x = bugfixes
2.4 = 2.3.x + new features ( compatible)
3.0 = incompatible changes
addition: 3.0 = incompatible changes, big new features
+1, thats absolutely my take, and my understanding about what is
common sense in the industry
And I don't think its
Bernd Fondermann schrieb:
On 9/14/06, Noel J. Bergman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I will read and reply to the various comments later, but I want to
put some
figures into the picture.
$ du -hs branches/v2.3/src/java trunk/src/java
13M branches/v2.3/src/java
15M trunk/src/java
$ svn
On 9/15/06, Jürgen Hoffmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi to all Developers,
I have been following this thread for some time now. Being a Person
that is only watching, I came to the conclusion that You as Developers
have a totally different understanding as of what should be a 2.4
Release.
As
Add chi-square-based spam filter approach to BayesianAnalyzer.
--
Key: JAMES-616
URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JAMES-616
Project: James
Issue Type: Improvement
Hi Stefano,
Stefano Bagnara schrieb:
So, do you think that current 2.3.0rc3 should be released as 3.0?
no. what is 2.3.0rc3 is, and stays 2.3.0rc3 and will be released as
2.3.0 possible Bugs within it should be released as 2.3.1
Main development (your roadmap to 2.4) should now be 3.0
Hi Bernd,
Bernd Fondermann schrieb:
... and probably common many others here at Apache. (Some are even
worse ;-)) It is sometimes painful, but this community is not driven
by project management, it is driven by _consent_. It's not always as
pragmatic as everyone would like to have it. And there
On 9/15/06, Stefano Bagnara [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Bernd Fondermann wrote:
[...]
There is some truth in this. But Eclipse is driven by companies, it is
like a software company.
We are not this way. That does not mean we aren't successfull, but
this is not an objective opinion either ;-)
Jürgen Hoffmann wrote:
I still don't know what Vincenzo and Noel want to do with the
next-minor release so I'm not able to vote now the number of their
release. We also don't have a string roadmap for next-major release
(6 months) and I would be more inclined in using 2.x if we don't add
some
On 9/15/06, Jürgen Hoffmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Bernd,
Bernd Fondermann schrieb:
That's really great. I'd guess you get some real value back for that!
At this point in time, the amount of value put into the project is much
much greater.
how can you say that?! you get other's and my
Bernd Fondermann wrote:
Bernd, this was by no means to be understood as an offense or anything
against other active contributors on this project. This List is neither
complete nor a concrete suggestion. Replace the Names in the Lists with
A, B, C, and D.
-1. Not agreed. I favor all the
On 9/15/06, Stefano Bagnara [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
JAMES Nightly Build System wrote:
---
Updating From Source Control
---
Reverted
Hello,
to whom it may interest:
There's a new version of yaJamesManager on Sourceforge.
It now has an error-handling for all kind of problems that may could appear.
Sourceforge:
http://sourceforge.net/projects/yajamesmanager
Testride:
http://www.nameservice.biz/yajamesmanager/
What's it
Bernd Fondermann wrote:
I'd like to get familiar with the automatic build process. On which
machine is it, and what script is running that? At first I thought it
must be minotaur/people, but did not find it.
Thanks,
Bernd
Hi Bernd,
The only automatic thing ASF give us is GUMP. Under the
On 9/15/06, Stefano Bagnara [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Bernd Fondermann wrote:
Bernd, this was by no means to be understood as an offense or anything
against other active contributors on this project. This List is neither
complete nor a concrete suggestion. Replace the Names in the Lists with
I think the reverted message is given because at the last build the
file was fixed in terms of tabs vs. spaces by our build script. Next
time, gump sees the local change and reverts the file to the svn
version.
On 9/15/06, Stefano Bagnara [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Bernd Fondermann wrote:
I'd
BTW, I didn't check: Are the builds now propagated to the download location?
On 9/15/06, Bernd Fondermann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think the reverted message is given because at the last build the
file was fixed in terms of tabs vs. spaces by our build script. Next
time, gump sees the local
Bernd Fondermann wrote:
Let's at first work together on trunk and then decide to release (when
time is due but quite soon).
If there are developments which are not completed, ok. Lets disable
them, or mark them as experimental, but release what we have. Then,
let's move on.
I am not opposing
Bernd Fondermann wrote:
BTW, I didn't check: Are the builds now propagated to the download
location?
As I wrote they are stalled on 29 august:
http://people.apache.org/builds/james/nightly/bin/
Maybe there's something we committed that broke the build process, or
simply something else on
Bernd Fondermann wrote:
I think the reverted message is given because at the last build the
file was fixed in terms of tabs vs. spaces by our build script. Next
time, gump sees the local change and reverts the file to the svn
version.
I thought that, too, but Vincenzo fixes tab/spaces few days
Maybe i forget to say that this is the handling i prefer..
bye
Norman
Norman Maurer (JIRA) schrieb:
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JAMES-424?page=all ]
Norman Maurer updated JAMES-424:
Attachment: headerFix.diff
With this diff it handles
Hi Stefano, Hi Bernd,
Bernd, this was by no means to be understood as an offense or
anything
against other active contributors on this project. This List is
neither
complete nor a concrete suggestion. Replace the Names in the Lists
with
A, B, C, and D.
-1. Not agreed. I favor all the
On 9/15/06, Stefano Bagnara [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Bernd Fondermann wrote:
Let's at first work together on trunk and then decide to release (when
time is due but quite soon).
If there are developments which are not completed, ok. Lets disable
them, or mark them as experimental, but release
On 9/15/06, Jürgen Hoffmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Stefano, Hi Bernd,
this is exactly why there should be certain assignments ( I did not use
responsibilities with a purpose ;) ) I see two parties right now. One
that ones to do the big thing, work on the next major release, and the
+1
(will there be unit tests?)
On 8/28/06, Noel J. Bergman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
One of the things I'd like for us to do is change the SMTP handler to allow
specifying the entry point for injecting messages into the pipeline, rather
than the hardcoded root, and likewise for FetchMail. So
On 9/15/06, Stefano Bagnara [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Bernd Fondermann wrote:
For me its:
2.3.x = bugfixes
2.4 = 2.3.x + new features ( compatible)
3.0 = incompatible changes
addition: 3.0 = incompatible changes, big new features
+1, thats absolutely my take, and my understanding about
Bernd Fondermann wrote:
Do you agree with one of these 2 plans? Have you, instead, a third
proposal (possibly including expected date to branch/date to release and
expected feature list)?
As I said, let's go forward with trunk. (Exception: make hotfixes to
2.3 and release that as 2.3.1
Bernd Fondermann wrote:
Stefano,
Sorry, cannot parse this. You lost me way before you said that -1
should not be the next version number for James. I feel stupid. You
are using too much words for me to cope with. Do you have 3 or 4
simple words summarizing your ideas?
Are you saying that, the
38 matches
Mail list logo
