james-server-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Bernd Fondermann <bf_...@brainlounge.de>
Subject Re: Fork mime4j mailing list
Date Sat, 10 Jan 2009 06:54:49 GMT
Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 2, 2009 at 11:41 AM, Markus Wiederkehr
> <markus.wiederkehr@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, Jan 2, 2009 at 9:39 AM, Robert Burrell Donkin
>> <robertburrelldonkin@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Thu, Jan 1, 2009 at 2:55 PM, Bernd Fondermann
>>> <bernd.fondermann@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>>> On 2008-12-29, Robert Burrell Donkin <robertburrelldonkin@gmail.com>
wrote:
>>>>> On Sat, Dec 27, 2008 at 11:21 AM, Oleg Kalnichevski <olegk@apache.org>
wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> <snip>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Folks,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The question is whether you want to encourage mime4j to evolve into
a
>>>>>> separate project with a community of its own or want to keep it closely
>>>>>> aligned with James. A separate dev list certainly will not help with
the
>>>>>> latter.
>>>>> james is a big project covering a lot of different topics. it's rare
>>>>> for any developer to be actively interested in every area.
>>>>>
>>>>> the server provides a focus for James by drawing together all the
>>>>> products developed. this focus creates a core community for the
>>>>> project.
>>>>>
>>>>> as products are factored out, they start to attract use cases beyond
>>>>> the core server. this helps to improve the quality of the library. the
>>>>> james server-dev list is high volume. this creates a barrier to entry
>>>>> for those who are interested in developing these new use cases. so
>>>>> IMHO as interest develops in the libraries, it's healthy to encourage
>>>>> them to develop their own communities safe in the knowledge that there
>>>>> will still be considerable intersection.
>>>>>
>>>>> it's hard to predict how active and popular FOSS projects will become
>>>>> and - of course - one does not necessarily imply the other. i'm happy
>>>>> to see a healthy community developing for mime4j and think the time is
>>>>> right to allow it a little more space.
>>>> +1
>>>>
>>>> mime4j more than other products within James has a chance to develop
>>>> its own life and lifecycle. Let's support this proactively.
>>>>
>>>> We should have a formal vote, shouldn't we?
>>> perhaps
>>>
>>> i still hope a few more developers will jump into this discussion thread...
>> I don't have a strong opinion about this. For me the [mime4j] prefix
>> and a gmail filter works well enough.
>>
>> But of course it's understandable that maybe some James server
>> developers feel that Mime4j should have its own list when nearly every
>> second mail sent to server-dev is about Mime4j.
> 
> this is more about giving mime4j more space than reducing traffic on
> this list. normal business on this list has been unusually slow over
> the last few months but it's likely to hot up sooner or later.
> 
>> On the other hand I'm not sure if a separation into an independent
>> project would be such a good idea. For example as DOM support in
>> Mime4j improves it might become a good alternative to JavaMail. When
>> that happens I would like to see support for Mime4j in the Mailet API.
>> That would tie the projects together again.
> 
> i think it unlikely that the Mailet 2 API will change much more. i
> hope that this year will see work begin on a replacement Mailet 3 API.
> 
>> Also I'm still new to this project. Can someone explain to me how
>> James Server and Mime4j are related at this point? The Mailet API is
>> centered around JavaMail. Is Mime4j used anywhere else in James
>> Server?
> 
> the James project encompasses the server and several other products
> including Mime4J. Mime4j is used by several products (including JSieve
> and IMAP) that are part of the James project but are not dependent on
> the server. the server uses everything the project produces (and so is
> central). ATM all these products share the server-dev list but as
> activity justifies it, they'll probably be split out too.

It would be benefitial if mime4j would be used in the server as the core 
mail handling framework, instead of JavaMail. Only think about the 
featues introduced like shared mime parts.

On the other hand, mime4j is used standalone in non-James products as 
well, like HttpMime, so it already has a life on its own and this must 
be kept in mind as the code evolves.

AFAIK, mime4j came to James as a contribution from outside. See
   http://www.mail-archive.com/server-dev@james.apache.org/msg01985.html
which is probably the starting point for the move to ASF.

I'll start a vote.

   Bernd



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


---------------------------------------------------------------------
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