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]