On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 8:42 PM, Robert Burrell Donkin <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 10:57 AM, Robert Burrell Donkin > <[email protected]> wrote: >> On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 10:24 AM, Norman Maurer <[email protected]> wrote: >>> Hi Robert, >>> comments inside... >>> 2008/12/13 Robert Burrell Donkin <[email protected]>: >>>> On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 4:56 PM, Norman Maurer <[email protected]> wrote: > > <snip> > >>> I think before the defunc it get called somewhere in the processor >>> chain todo the mapping. At the moment it seems the virtualuser-store >>> will get never used. Can you maybe give me some pointers where I can >>> dig a bit deeper ? >> >> i'll take a look but i'm not familiar with this area so it may take a >> little while... > > haven't managed to find the day to track down the problem and > demonstrate that it's fixed with an integration test but i did fix a > bug i'd introduced on friday which stopped the spool working. i have a > test for that so hopefully it should stay fixed now. > > i'm working on a test for the virtual user stuff but if you are in a > rush, it might be worthwhile just updating and retrying again.
ATM the standard james configuration has a virtual user block (which allows mappings to be added and removed through the remote manager) but the mailet configuration uses RecipientIsLocal which is not virtual host aware. i can't find a suitable matcher that uses the new VUT interfaces. shouldn't be too difficult to create one, though. - robert --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
