Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
> releasing a 3.0 would involve a series of milestone releases to
> build confidence in the new codebase rather than a manual process
> of re-evaluating every change.
Re-evaluating implies that they were evaluated in the first place.
> i hope to have a function complete IMAP4rev2 working in time for
> ApacheConEU. we could aim to create an initial 3.0 technology
> preview then.
I'll look forward to sitting with you Monday afternoon, and anytime that
isn't Tuesday.
> i'm happy with avalon but i accept that using avalon (as an IoC) is
> a major negative factor in attracting new developers
I think that's a false truth that has become a meme. Drop the name Avalon,
say that JANES has its own infrastructure, and the "Avalon is dead" nonsense
goes away. Although we can and should continue the pojofication of JAMES
over time.
A major area to look at is configuration. This is as much, if not more so,
for the Mailet API as for internal interfaces. For Mailets, I'm strongly
leaning towards annotations, but there's more to this area than just
declaring injectors.
> excluding IMAP+deployment, the only change that springs to mind are
> the JAMES handler framework improvements. if inheritance were to be
> replaced by delegation for this framework then most modules would have
> very few changes.
Sounds like the start of a discussion.
--- Noel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
