james-mime4j-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Oleg Kalnichevski (JIRA)" <mime4j-...@james.apache.org>
Subject [jira] Commented: (MIME4J-149) Fix Field, RawField and ParsedField consistency/confustion, dependency hell.
Date Mon, 07 Feb 2011 13:54:30 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MIME4J-149?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12991384#comment-12991384

Oleg Kalnichevski commented on MIME4J-149:


Has this issue been resolved? Are you planning to do more work in that area? Can we close
this issue as resolved or move it to 0.8 if more refactoring is needed?


> 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: 0.7
> 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.
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira


View raw message