On 5/15/07, Jukka Zitting <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
OK. I guess the attributes can be any serializable objects, so the implementation should use standard Java serialization in case it doesn't know the type of the attribute.
I *think* that we originally intended attributes to be String's, but if they aren't strongly typed then I guess Serializable is correct.
Is the repository implementation required to keep the original key (from mail.getName()) when stroring a new message, or can it replace it with an internal identifier?
Good question, In practice all our current implementations do. The benefit is that it is possible to trace a message name in the logs, however there is nothing (AFAIK) in the functionality which depends upon the name staying the same. Each cycle of activity on a Mail object begins with getting the name (or list of names) from the repository, and any Store should (but may not) mark the end of a cycle. I guess you have to weigh up the cost of developing the code to keep the name against the risk of name changes breaking something. I would suggest that if this is a significant factor then we could look in more detail at James and try to design in this variability. d. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
