Mailing-List: contact mime4j-dev-help@james.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: mime4j-dev@james.apache.org
Message-ID: <1540146170.1262121929451.JavaMail.jira@brutus.apache.org>
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 2009 21:25:29 +0000 (UTC)
From: "Stefano Bagnara (JIRA)" <mime4j-dev@james.apache.org>
To: mime4j-dev@james.apache.org
Subject: [jira] Created: (MIME4J-149) Fix Field, RawField and ParsedField
 consistency/confustion, dependency hell.
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Fix Field, RawField and ParsedField consistency/confustion, dependency hell.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

                 Key: MIME4J-149
                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MIME4J-149
             Project: JAMES Mime4j
          Issue Type: Task
    Affects Versions: 0.6
            Reporter: Stefano Bagnara
            Assignee: Stefano Bagnara
            Priority: Minor
             Fix For: 0.8


Partially discussed here:
http://markmail.org/message/7n63uorvnhzqx7mx

the "new" Field interface creates a bridge between the parser and the rest of the code. While the bridge could expose potential in fact it expose lack of consistence and unintuitive interfaces where you don't know if you are dealing with raw fields or parsed fields and some code ends un parsing already parsed fields.

Maybe we'll reintroduce a common interface later, but for now I much more prefer to remove cycles and to have much clearer contracts about what is returne/used by the stream parser and by the dom.


-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.