james-server-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Robert Burrell Donkin" <robertburrelldon...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [imap] Website?
Date Mon, 17 Nov 2008 12:38:38 GMT
On Mon, Nov 17, 2008 at 8:32 AM, Stefano Bagnara <apache@bago.org> wrote:
> Robert Burrell Donkin ha scritto:
>> i'd like to try to push out a imap M1 this year. one of the remaining
>> jobs is creating a website. so we need to decide upon an URL.
>>
>> http://james.apache.org/imap? http://james.apache.org/protocol/imap?
>> http://james.apache.org/server/imap?
>
> http://james.apache.org/protocol/imap
>
> We used that structure in svn, maybe it's better to choose the same for
> the web.
>
> About Demetrio comment I think we can give more or less visibility to
> IMAP independently from the url we use.

the right position in subversion is a topic we should return to

the reasoning behind james/protocol/imap was that it allowed a group
of protocols library to be built up if they are factored out from the
main server. i'm keen on this idea: i think that it offers easier
maintenance in the long run, reduces pressure on server releases
(individual protocol libraries have separate release cycles) and
reduces the quantity of code that a new developer needs to learn to
start contributing. however, i'm not sure how convinced other people
were by this approach.

an alternative argument is that IMAP has quite a complex internal
module structure and that it's neater and more consistent to just add
new protocols at the top level under james without the internal
grouping.

opinions?

- robert

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


Mime
View raw message