Stefano Bagnara wrote:
> I'm +1 to MINA usage for our listening services.
Same here.
> Imho James 3.0 won't be out before mid 2007 (optimistic)
That's not anyone else's goal, so I hope that it isn't yours. I'd like to
see JAMES v3 by year end. But it all depends upon what one calls JAMES v3.
> Otherwise we could start implementing MINA based services while keeping
> old services updated.
We should maintain both. MINA is essential for scaling to large numbers of
connections, and for STARTTLS, but not for the majority of JAMES users.
> Imho most of the code should be shared between MINA and non MINA services.
+1
That was always the intent. The protocol handler should not care how it
gets the next package of data, just that it does. And, happily,
telnet-class protocols are line-oriented, making things easy.
--- Noel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
