Hi Stefano, Am Montag, den 20.11.2006, 13:03 +0100 schrieb Stefano Bagnara:
> thank you for the explanation. I'm not sure I understand why we need to > use this namespaces in james. > If I understood you javamail has this namespaces, ok, but I'm not sure > it is simpler to keep this layer also in james... IMAP needs them too, to announce the available "drives" to the client. And I wouldn't call them a layer, because only the client has to care about the interpretation. Apart from very few exceptions we only have mailboxNames (Strings). > The only real advantage I see in using namespaces against standard > mountpoints is that namespaces allow you to specify a different > hierarchy delimiter, otherwise we could simply consider the first part > of the path as the namespace and we would have the same behaviours of > using namespaces... I'm not against doing this by convention. At the moment I'm even doing that because I'm lazy. ;-) Defining a global hierarchy delimiter would make some things easier. We need to define the available namespaces (roots) somewhere for IMAP and I think that it's a good idea to do it at a central point. It could be reused by other services (e.g. JavaMail Store bridge). The only alternative would be defining it privately for IMAP. BTW: I appreciate your efforts to pull out complexity. :-) I consider over-design a greater risk than inflexible features. > What I like about the virtual provider is that I think greatly simplify > our core concepts by removing the complexity of the current > db/dbfile/file from most of the configuration. So I think we should > introduce new layers only when they really give us advantages... The VirtualMailboxManager is a layer. But it is completely transparent for the API. The accessing code just knows MailboxManagerProvider and MailboxManager. The backend code needs to implement MailboxManagerFactory. VirtualMailboxManager is interchangeable. > Maybe I'm simply missing some "namespace" related feature.... Maybe because you consider it as layer. I would call it bookmark or advise. Well, I'm thinking much about this. I like the single unix root much more than windows drives. ;-) But windows does not allow to use different delimiters on that drives! ;-) Joachim --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
