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 Re: [mime4j] Any chance of 0.4 release any time soon?
Date Sun, 25 May 2008 14:00:58 GMT
On Sun, May 25, 2008 at 2:41 PM, Oleg Kalnichevski <olegk@apache.org> wrote:
> On Sun, 2008-05-25 at 14:29 +0100, Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
>> On Sun, May 25, 2008 at 1:04 PM, Oleg Kalnichevski <olegk@apache.org> wrote:
>> > On Sun, 2008-05-25 at 11:27 +0100, Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
>> >> On Sun, May 25, 2008 at 8:18 AM, Robert Burrell Donkin
>> >> <robertburrelldonkin@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> > On Sat, May 24, 2008 at 1:22 PM, Oleg Kalnichevski <olegk@apache.org>
wrote:
>> >> >> On Sat, 2008-05-24 at 07:05 +0100, Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
>> >> >>> On Fri, May 23, 2008 at 7:29 PM, Oleg Kalnichevski <olegk@apache.org>
wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > <snip>
>> >> >
>> >> >>> > Can I be of help?
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> yes
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> a great place to start would be by reviewing the bug list on
JIRA
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> MIME4J-30,
>> >>
>> >> i'll ping jochen to see whether he wants to commit his local fork
>> >> before 0.4 or not
>> >>
>> >> >> MIMEJ4-40 and MIMEJ4-41 appear to have an acceptable
>> >> >> solution. It is just a matter of applying the patch.
>> >> >
>> >> > quite possibly. i'll take a look.
>> >>
>> >> no rights for patches so created tests and fixes from scratch
>> >>
>> >> oleg could you check whether
>> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MIME4J-34 needs more work?
>> >>
>> >
>> > ´╗┐Robert
>> >
>> > In my opinion it does not. At least from my biased point of view.
>>
>> if you could update the JIRA outlining the deficiencies of the current
>> codebase then we can take a look at sorting them out
>
> I guess I did not make myself clear enough. I think the current
> implementation is perfectly okay, at least from the HttpMime /
> HttpClient standpoint. I am not in a position to comment on the round
> tripping issue, though, as I do not know the MIME spec well enough.
>
> As far I can tell the issue can be closed.

the round tripping needs further analysis but i'm happy to leave this for 0.5

- robert
Mime
View raw message