james-server-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Robert Burrell Donkin" <robertburrelldon...@gmail.com>
Subject [modules] Backends
Date Sat, 02 Feb 2008 11:13:52 GMT
i've been thinking on the recent threads on modules eg [1]

i think that the current system is ok for protocol integration (SMTP,
POP3, etc) but backends don't really fit very well. for example,
avalon-user-function, torque-mailboxmanagerfunction etc don't make as
much sense. i am still convinced that we need to move out
implementations from core-library and into modules with dependencies
that can be managed easily.

i now wonder whether it might be better to aggregate backend classes
according to the technologies they use. so (for example) any backend
code that uses torque would be in a torque-backend module, any code
that uses avalon to store data in a avalon-backend module and so on.
any backend implementations that just use java would be moved into a
base-backend module.

- robert

[1] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/james-server-dev/200801.mbox/%3c32710174.110571200396021368.JavaMail.root@elysia.void.it%3e

---------------------------------------------------------------------
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