> Maybe the better solution is to put the mailet API on a separate release > schedule, so it's clear that James 2.1.x implements mailet API 1.0 and > James 2.2 implements mailet API 1.1.
Absolutely, the sooner we get round to miving it into its own cvs module the happier I'll be. Though as a guy with no time I haven't much leverage at the moment! > I think this is the first revision to the mailet API (aside from v3 > changes) since its release many years ago. And as it's minor, I would > move it to 1.1 as opposed to using the Microsoft versioning formula: I thought we were on Mailet V2 already, is it really Mailet v1 James v2? Anything is fine by me, but I think we may have to stick with 2 & 3. Even though we may be plain *wrong* I'm afraind that we've spent too long propogating the mistake in mail and on the wiki and to revert to the correct versioning would probably cause more confusion than it'd remove. d. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
