Steve Brewin wrote:
> Danny Angust wrote:
> > 1/ modify existing James Container to support alternative
> > processor types than "LnearProcessor"
> I am rather hoping that, perhaps in vain, that someone else might take
this
> on while I do (2) below.
I may get to that. I was thinking of starting a task list of things to do,
and seeing if we could organize people to help on them.
> > I'm tempted to resurrect the debate about why processors are not
> > specialized Mailets , but I'll just mention once it and see
> > if anyone has anything new to say. :-)
LinearProcessor is the familar matcher/mailet flow. Another processor type
could implement a newer configuration scheme; an approach I seem to recall
you favored. Some other processor type could conceivable provide
distributed container support. Steve's SieveProcessor implements the Sieve
language, with its own operations.
--- Noel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
