On Feb 7, 2008 10:36 PM, Steve Brewin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Noel J. Bergman wrote on 07 February 2008 00:14: > > > Embeding james in databases is not as silly as you seem to > > think, Dan > > > Debruner proposed embeding james in derby a couple of years ago. > > > Admins want to run the products they know, and as little else as > > > possible. > > > > That's generally down to laziness, not good architecture. > > And it can hamper other things. > > > > For example, let's say that you take JAMES and embed it into > > the web container. > > > > - What happens when you decide to cluster your web container? > > - How does it effect your network topology? Firewalls, DMZ, etc? > > > > And what are you using JAMES for in the web container? > > > > There is clearly a value to refactoring our component > > architecture, and possibly one in allowing JAMES to move into > > a J2EE container. But the Web container isn't the right > > place for it. The EJB container comes closer. > > A JCA Resource Adapter comes closer still as we don't get pinned down by the > stringent JEE/EJB rules and can use our container dé jour to expose relevant > services. I posted about this many moons ago.
+1 > Can someone explain the benefits of James being deployable to a servlet > container (this being the target of a .war package)? Perhaps I'm being > stupid, but I see few if any. 1 being embeddable is designing for serendipity 2 easy installation 3 web administration 4 web mail - robert --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
