james-server-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stefano Bagnara <apa...@bago.org>
Subject Re: [Mime4J] Support For Non-Streaming Inputs
Date Mon, 24 Sep 2007 10:20:37 GMT
Bernd Fondermann ha scritto:
> On 9/23/07, Jochen Wiedmann <jochen.wiedmann@gmail.com> wrote:
>> robert burrell donkin-2 wrote:
>>> this is the problem with lots of small patches: i don't understand
>>> where you are taking the design
>> In general, non-committers are expected to split their work up into smaller
>> patches, because it helps the reviewers.
> Generally, yes. But if you'd like to present an alternative
> experimental design as a whole, we could as well grant you a sandbox.
> BTW, this would be the appropriate approach for such efforts even for
> committers.
>   Bernd

As far as I've understood until now the "whole new design" was from
Robert. Jochen patches are small performance improvement over the
current design.

The main problem is that Jochen patches make it more difficult to keep
supporting the new design from Robert (or at least make the whole thing
less "clean")

I don't know what design is better for mime4j and I didn't analyze the
patches in depth to judge their quality. What I can tell is that Jochen
patches serve a specific concrete purpose (commons-upload integration
and its needed capabilities) while I feel Robert ones more abstract. I
guess Robert "design" is related to specific IMAP usage, so it would
probably help (me) to understand what IMAP features are involved by this
design decisions (and how).

Ignoring the technical/design issue I think at this time it is better
for mime4j to increase its community/acceptance by helping other
projects (e.g. commons-upload) to use mime4j. IMHO collecting users that
depends on the library is the best thing to ensure that future design
choices will satisfy anyone needs.

At the same time, we should try to be our first users with JAMES Server
but we currently don't use it. If Robert design is a prerequisite to be
able to use mime4j in the IMAP implementation then this worth discussing

I'd also like to know what Niklas Therning thinks about this issue. He
is one of the original authors and probably one of the few current users
of this library.


To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-dev-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: server-dev-help@james.apache.org

View raw message