+1,
Cheers for the good work. Thank you.
Regards,
Quan
On Wed, Jan 8, 2025 at 6:28 PM Jan-Eric Hellenberg
wrote:
> +1
>
> We agree with Benoit and Tung and think that the Postgres version is
> great for deployments where the Distributed James server is overkill.
>
> On 07.01.25 10:41 AM, Tran
+1
We agree with Benoit and Tung and think that the Postgres version is
great for deployments where the Distributed James server is overkill.
On 07.01.25 10:41 AM, Tran Tung wrote:
+1
I see many new users start with JPA, Spring app. However, most of
these variants are no longer actively mai
+1
I see many new users start with JPA, Spring app. However, most of these
variants are no longer actively maintained as they have become outdated.
Hopefully, Postgresql app will be strong alternative.
Tung Tran
On 1/7/25 3:48 PM, Rene Cordier wrote:
Hello everybody,
After a bit more than
+1,
Rene.
On 1/7/25 3:48 PM, Rene Cordier wrote:
Hello everybody,
After a bit more than a year of work on a Postgresql implementation
for Apache James, we would like to finally propose to merge our work
to the master branch of the project and add official support for it
with Apache James.
+1
This backend is IMO the good basis for a almost 3 dependency performant James
server, easier to use than the Distributed James server but with the same level
of reliability and quality than it.
Complementary work would be needed for easing the overall settup (IE just
defining as a user a fe
