james-server-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Harmeet Bedi" <harm...@kodemuse.com>
Subject Re: the nntp effort on in james server !!!!
Date Wed, 03 Apr 2002 08:55:27 GMT
From: "Harmeet Bedi" <harmeet@kodemuse.com>
> > - Making the backend more flexible. Maybe map to SMPT/POP3
> > backend store on
> > the other hand I feel NNTP is nicely decoupled.
>


From: "Danny Angus" <danny@thought.co.uk>
> I think NNTP should use the same avalon framework as POP & SMTP (although
> I'm not volunteering to do this, so I guess my vote isn't really fair..)
> this would mean that it could use file or DB, and share configuration
> information with other blocks.
>


I think it is a given that having the same mechanism for NNTP is a clean and
good thing to do, but here are some advantages for keeping the NNTP
repository separate.
- Faster than the repository for POP & SMTP.
- Streamed. Entire message content is never in memory.
- It is easier to separte NNTP from the other parts. Folks may want to use
NNTP Server but may want to use another mail servers. Such a user would not
need to worry about non-nntp configuration.
- I still don't know what and if there is a gain in functionality. I haven't
heard anyone want a db Backend for newsgroup mail. Why build, if there is no
known advantage ? On the other hand if someone has a real world need that
would be motivation.
- How stable is the POP-SMTP backend ? There have been a few emails about
this. When I looked at the Avalon File Repository, I was a bit nervous. I
think it is based on serialization, and that approach has some problems,
like say schema evolution, speed etc. If SMTP-POP3 repository is not
completly safe, maybe we should continue with NNTP repository for some time
and then revisit.
- The NNTP repository is a lot simpler. Minimal coupling.

What do you think ?

Here is a proposal for your vote:
Have a separate distribution for NNTP Server. All other parts will be
disabled. Advantages are:
- Provides a minimum configuration changes needed package for users that
only need NNTP.
- This help the James brand and increase the number of users.
- I personally feel that POP3-SMTP and NNTP are of interest to
(mostly)separate groups of users. I also feel that the users would want to
try POP3-SMTP and NNTP Server at different times, and are less lilkely to
try them together.  One precedent is INN Server. It includes NNTP Server but
not POP-SMTP Servers. James-NNTP could be targeted as an alternative to INN.

Harmeet


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:james-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:james-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org>


Mime
View raw message