james-server-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Bernd Fondermann" <bernd.fonderm...@googlemail.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Move spring-deployment module to TRUNK
Date Wed, 10 Oct 2007 05:35:36 GMT
On 10/8/07, Noel J. Bergman <noel@devtech.com> wrote:
> I will go on record that I oppose a move to Spring, and have said so on
> multiple occassions.  However, I do not oppose optional support for Spring.

The Phoenix deployment will live on. All the users having their own
components and whatever customizations will be supported. For new
users starting to use James there is no fundamental advantage chosing
one deployment over the other. Except if they already have Spring
components (or POJOs) they'd like to integrate with.

>
> So long as we are agreed on that, I'm +1 to on the latter.

Agreed.

>
> > As a consequence, we would be able to release a Spring-container-based
> > Server runtime besides our regular Avalon-based.
>
> I'll start another thread on Avalon.

I should have better said "Phoenix-based" instead of "Avalon-based".
We cannot live without our Excalibur bindings.

> How much does your proposed merger effect the stability of code that
> couldn't care less about Spring, e.g., the Avalon-based release?

Zero. The only thing we changed is
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JAMES-803
But this is just enabling a feature in alternative FileSystem
implementations (as James/Spring has one). James/Phoenix behavior did
not change. All the checks are still in place at the more appropriate
place.

  Bernd

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


Mime
View raw message