Anne, Anything you do specifically with config.xml and user repositories today may not work in future versions of JAMES, since we want to move to a more flexibile idea of configuration.
Alternatively, you might create a model of what JAMES configuration should be, and then look at how to map between that model and today's configuration points. Take a look at http://wiki.apache.org/james/MailingListManager as an example, where the entire configuration for the MLM is intended to be stored in a Directory Server. Personally, I feel that this might be a good way to go for JAMES in general, which would support dynamic reconfiguration, easy admin, clustering, etc. When I look at WebSphere Application Server, they have a similar directory idea, except using the file system instead of a Directory Server to store their configuration. ezmlm also uses the file system, whereas the aforementioned MLM proposal takes similar ideas and moves them into a modern directory server, instead. Things that could come of this: - A revisiting and better understanding of JAMES components, configuration and relationships. - A flexible structure for managing JAMES configuration - A mapping between that structure and today's limited capabilities (the XML files and user repository) - JMX support and documentation - Interfaces (UI and/or BSF) to the JMX support. Completing the first two would be a major win, and would enable the remainder. --- Noel --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
