The goal is not to distribute a derivative copy,
per-se, but to allow different implementations of the
internals.  There is no intention to provide a sar,
but once one has a sar, jars can be dropped in and the
xml config files updated to use the different
implementations.

I guess basically I'm asking: Is it ok to use the
James name outside of the org.apache namespace?

Thanks,
- Phillip

--- Serge Knystautas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Maybe you could give a bit more background so we can
> help "guide" you there.
> 
> If you want to distribute a derivative copy of
> James, then you cannot 
> call it James.  As for reworking the code, putting
> James code here and 
> there, a maildir implementation, whatever else...
> all that's just fine 
> and great.  In fact some of those might be
> interesting patches as others 
> could be interested.
> 
> Anyway, again nothing you've described is wrong. 
> But where are you 
> trying to go and what are you asking of us?
> 
> -- 
> Serge Knystautas
> President
> Lokitech >> software . strategy . design >>
> http://www.lokitech.com
> p. 301.656.5501
> e. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> Phillip Smith wrote:
> > This is my first post to this list so if it�s in
> the
> > wrong place, please advise.
> > 
> > I have re-implemented
> > org.apache.james.smtpserver.SMTPHandler to
> separate
> > the parsing of the stream from the handling of its
> > contents and to be configured for either blocking
> or
> > non-blocking mode.  I intend to do the same for
> the
> > org.apache.james.pop3server.POP3Handler and IMAP. 
> It
> > has been recently decided to add a MailRepository
> for
> > a modified MailDir format.  I know the James is
> built
> > on the Phoenix (Avalon), and allows its components
> to
> > be pluggable � but at want point does it stop
> being
> > James, if it stops at all?  I still intend to use
> the
> > Mailet functionality, the incoming spooling, and
> the
> > remote forwarding capabilities.  I�ve put
> non-James
> > classes (generic parsing) in my package namespace
> > (<toplevel-domain>.protocol.smtp, etc).  I�ve put
> > James classes in (<toplevel-domain>.james., etc). 
> Is
> > this appropriate?  I don�t want to call it James
> if it
> > isn�t, and vise versa.
> > 
> > Suggestions, advice, guidance requested
> 
> 
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> 
> 
> 


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to