----- Original Message -----
From: "Stefano Bagnara" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "James Developers List" <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 07, 2006 12:56 AM
Subject: Re: MimeMessage handling optimizations/changes for 2.3.0a2
Markus Kühn wrote:
How different? I think you experience/work could help us following the
right path...
Exception handling is vital to me. It's more detailed. Something that
were not present in james 2.1.3.
It is only a modification based on my goals, nothing else. But I don't
think james is off the path in this respect.
So this is somewhat similar to the current exception handling?
http://wiki.apache.org/james/HandlingExceptions
Yes, but less options. I only support consumption of recipients by
matcher/mailets and mailets can specify a list of other mailets which the
message should ignore any time later. I don't think that is of general use.
JDBC mailstore classes can write the body of the message into the file
rep, as discussed before.
Isn't this the same as using dbfile repositories in current james?
No. I use db configuration with a modified JDBCSpoolRep and
JDBCMailStore.
What are the difference if you also store the mail informations in the db
and the message body in files?
Messages are stored entirely in the db, except those that exceed my size
limit; in
this case the body remains a file and is moved into the file rep.
Have you implemented more efficient interfaces (move instead of
store+remove) or what else?
Not interfaces. It's a different design. E. g. the 'incoming' spooler is a
new class, using only messages from the
handler (no loading from the db).
Most of the code was changed more or less. That's just because of the
different priorities, less flexibility more simplicity.
Markus
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
