bodewig commented on pull request #161:
URL: https://github.com/apache/ant/pull/161#issuecomment-954050214
Mailer sounds like a good location, I agree.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to
bodewig commented on pull request #161:
URL: https://github.com/apache/ant/pull/161#issuecomment-953895701
@twogee while adding documentation I stumbled over `MailLogger` which uses
`MimeMailer` internally (and that I forgot myself as well). It would be
probably be a good target to adapt
bodewig commented on pull request #161:
URL: https://github.com/apache/ant/pull/161#issuecomment-953881596
thank you @twogee
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment
bodewig commented on pull request #161:
URL: https://github.com/apache/ant/pull/161#issuecomment-940684141
I'm afraid we are talking past each other as I don't understand the question
:-)
Current master creates ant-javamail.jar containing `MimeMailer` and its
nested classes. I'd lik
bodewig commented on pull request #161:
URL: https://github.com/apache/ant/pull/161#issuecomment-939327416
I really prefer to make this two separate artifacts, one using javax.mail,
the other one using jakarta.mail. Two jars, new artifactId for a new jar and so
on.
--
This is an automat
bodewig commented on pull request #161:
URL: https://github.com/apache/ant/pull/161#issuecomment-933179077
Personally I'd prefer two separate jars and two separate POMs.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use
bodewig commented on pull request #161:
URL: https://github.com/apache/ant/pull/161#issuecomment-932931398
There might be a way to reduce the code duplication between the two mailer
classes, but that can be done as a refactoring later. Also we'll need a new POM
and a new artifact to publis
