if anyone else wants to express an opinion, please do so now On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 7:00 PM, Robert Burrell Donkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > JAMES 2.3.x contains mailet and mailet-api jars. the contents are now > in http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/james/mailet/api/trunk/. this means > that clearly API classes such as Mailet are mixed in with clearly > utility classes such as GenericMailet. it would be good to release > 2.3.x improvements to these classes but IMO this needs to be sorted > out first. > > we've talk before about whether a library for utility classes (in > addition to standard-mailets) would be useful. i would like to propose > introducing mailet-base to contain utility classes for the mailet-api. > this would leave standard-mailets free for implementations and > mailet-api free to contain just the API. i propose to judge each > classes in http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/james/mailet/api/trunk/ by > it's merits so i don't want to propose contents at this stage just > principle. > > here's my +1 > > - robert > > --8<------------------------------------------------------------------------- > [ ] +1 Create mailet-base > [ ] +0 > [ ] -0 > [ ] -1 Do not create mailet-base > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
