Hi Robert,

thx for digging a bit deeper. I think we just need a Mailet which do
the "rewrite" of the recipients and add it before the LocalDelivery
mailet.

Anythink I miss ?

Cheers,
Norman


2008/12/14 Robert Burrell Donkin <[email protected]>:
> On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 10:02 AM, Robert Burrell Donkin
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 9:44 AM, Robert Burrell Donkin
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> 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.
>>
>> ok
>>
>> i think that the root cause of this issue is that James does not use
>> the VUT stuff when implementing the isLocalXXX calls in MailContext. i
>> think that the correct approach would be to add support into James and
>> make virtual users a core supported feature in james 3.
>>
>> unless anyone has any objections, i will dive in and implement.
>
> spoke too soon
>
> after taking a better look at the code, need to set up some more
> configuration stuff in james
>
> - robert
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to