Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-james-server-user-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-james-server-user-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id EFC75E21C for ; Tue, 29 Jan 2013 15:57:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 36339 invoked by uid 500); 29 Jan 2013 15:57:32 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-james-server-user-archive@james.apache.org Received: (qmail 36290 invoked by uid 500); 29 Jan 2013 15:57:32 -0000 Mailing-List: contact server-user-help@james.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: List-Help: List-Post: List-Id: "James Users List" Reply-To: "James Users List" Delivered-To: mailing list server-user@james.apache.org Received: (qmail 36264 invoked by uid 99); 29 Jan 2013 15:57:31 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 29 Jan 2013 15:57:31 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.5 required=5.0 tests=RCVD_NUMERIC_HELO,SPF_NEUTRAL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (athena.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [91.183.38.48] (HELO srv1.aos.io) (91.183.38.48) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 29 Jan 2013 15:57:25 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-UserIsAuth: true Received: from 212.74.97.241 (EHLO [192.168.119.98]) ([212.74.97.241]) by srv1.aos.io (JAMES SMTP Server ) with ESMTPA ID 7031888; Tue, 29 Jan 2013 16:57:01 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <5107F14D.3070306@apache.org> Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2013 15:57:01 +0000 From: Eric Charles User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:19.0) Gecko/20130117 Thunderbird/19.0 To: James Users List Subject: Re: Mixing ver 2.x and 3.x References: <5107F055.8050402@malcolms.com> In-Reply-To: <5107F055.8050402@malcolms.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org On 29/01/2013 15:52, Jerry M wrote: > I have a production systemthat's been running 2.x forever. Pretty much > stable with no real problems. I don't have the time, nor do I want to > take the risk at this point to even think about doing a complete > conversion to 3. And technically, it's still in beta, correct? But I > desperately need an IMAP server for a couple of situations. So a few > questions... > > 1) James 3.x does support IMAP, correct Correct > > 2) Is James 3.x / IMAP stable enough to use, assuming I accept the > typicalbeta-code risks? It all depends on your requirements and user expectations. If you read the mailing list, the biggest issues so far are related to thread (spool, remote delivery) not working at a certain time. Just give it a try... > > 3) Would you foresee any issues if I install 3.x in the same box with my > production 2.x assuming I attach 3.x to a completely different IP address? > You will have issues if both james use the same ports. > Thanks. > > Jerry > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-user-unsubscribe@james.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: server-user-help@james.apache.org > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-user-unsubscribe@james.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: server-user-help@james.apache.org