> Moved the storeMail code from James (MailetContext) to > remoteDelivery (also part of JAMES-392). > 1) we don't use MailetContext.storeMail anymore and we can > safely remove that deprecated method. > 2) we can now override enableAliases/enableForwarding in the > local LocalDelivery configuration.
Please look at the change and answer this questions: 1) Should I move the enableAliases/enableForward directly to the LocalDelivery? For backward compatibility I chose to put them from the "James" config to the mailcontext attributes so that LocalDelivery can lookup this values but I'm almost convinced that it would be better to move the 2 informations to the localdelivery only. I'm not sure that trying to achieve backward compatibility in the config.xml is a good idea (we would need a lot of junk in the code and in the config to do that). Please note that I already changed the place where you have to declare mailetpackages/matcherpackages and the place you declare the main spool repository. 2) IgnoreCase is instead used more than once and by more clients (Not only LocalDelivery) and so I was thinking that we should move this configuration to the UserRepository interface. Should I do that? 3) Should I remove the deprecated method storeMail from MailetContext now? We also have a few other deprecated methods "UserRepository.getAttributes(String name)", "AbstractRedirect.getExistingReturnPath(Mail mail)", Resources.USERS_MANAGER, Resources.MAIL_SERVER, Resources.TRANSPORT, Resources.TMP_REPOSITORY, IOUtil.bufferedCopy, JdbcDataSource.killAllConnections, JdbcDataSource.killConnection, RFC822DateFormat.toString. Considering they were already deprecated in the previous release IMHO we can safely remove all of them: do you agree? 4) With this change I could split the LocalDelivery in 2 different new mailets (leave LocalDelivery for backward compatibility) and create a LocalUsersAliasingForwarding mailet that just apply aliasing and forwarding for the mails processed and a LocalDelivery that simply deliver the message to a repository named like the destination of the message being processed (with no lookup on users). This would allow much more flexible Configurations. 5) I can add configurations to the LocalDelivery (or the 2 new mailets) in order to be able to use a different UserRepository (different from the LocalUsers) or a different inboxes repositories by allowing local "overriding" configurations: what do you think? You can see the diff in the previous svn commit 239947 or here: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JAMES-392?page=all Stefano --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
