james-server-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stefano Bagnara <apa...@bago.org>
Subject Re: JAMES 3.0 Milestone 1 or Alpha?
Date Thu, 12 Jul 2007 20:31:23 GMT
robert burrell donkin ha scritto:
> On 7/12/07, Stefano Bagnara <apache@bago.org> wrote:
>> I just think that Robert should tell us the better moment wrt him IMAP
>> work. And maybe we could even release a 3.0M1 without IMAP enabled by
>> default.
> the IMAP code used by default has not change. this code base has
> issues with at least two modern clients but is ok (but limited) for
> older ones. the experimental rewrite is not used by default.

I admit I had no time to follow all of your patches. I read them one by
one, but I don't get the whole picture of changes between the
"monolitic" imapserver module and the new experimental modules.
The "imapserver" was already experimental and we have no previous
releases including it, so I think we should try to find an answer to
your refactoring and keep only one of the 2 imapserver.

Can you summarize main differences between imapserver and the new
experimental*+imap* modules ?

>> > Stefano Bagnara-2 wrote:
>> >> Unfortunately, as far as I understand it currently no one of the
>> active
>> >> committers is willing to prepare a release from the current code
>> (and to
>> >> collect agreements for this).
>> >>
>> > But isn't the entire process automated?
>> > I mean it already runs nightly. It would be only required to stick a
>> 3.0M1
>> > label, tag that version and publish on the main site the collected JIRA
>> > changes (there's a plug-in that does that automatically).
>> Yes, but at Apache releasing means something more than building: we have
>> to take care of any legal issue with code we release and we have to vote
>> and agree on the number and the date. I know this seems to be some easy
>> stuff, but in my experience it isn't.
> +1
> i'll see if i can find time to review the code base and improve the build

I locally upgraded cornerstone/avalon/excalibur and the whole dependency
model for maven2. I didn't commit it yet because I found an issue with
latest cornerstone release and I'm now waiting a 2.2.2 release from the
excalibur guys.

Btw this is not a blocking/important issue for a milestone release.

>> > Sorry but shoudn't be this reversed? I.e. developers to convince
>> users about
>> > the stability of their project and the importance to use it?
>> LOL, you are right. Unfortunately I don't have any tool to convince
>> others that the code in trunk was not so bad and not stable as Noel (or
>> anyone else) thought.
> different people have different motivations

I'd add: "sometime the motivation is collecting different motivations", ;-)

>> I think the only solution will come from the community: your message is
>> an help. Other users/developers could try helping, too.
> +1
>> What there is in trunk is really not important compared to the
>> community: we need again an active/live community, then we can discuss
>> about trunk and how to release.
> +1
> if you think that there should be release and are willing to help work
> towards one then it might well happen
> - robert

I didn't get if "you" it's me or Toni.
If it's me, I'm willing to help (even if I have limited spare time
currently) only by request: I won't be the releaser, and I won't push
anything. If someone want me to update the website (e.g: generate 3.0
pages, add news/downloads for the milestone), to help fixing some bug,
to explain some feature we introduced and so on he/they will have to ask.


To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-dev-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: server-dev-help@james.apache.org

View raw message