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: Project status and perception
Date Wed, 13 May 2009 10:35:00 GMT
On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 3:28 PM, Bernd Fondermann <bf_jak@brainlounge.de> wrote:


> "Contribution" covers everything from installing, running and reporting
> test results to bug reports, documentation patches, code patches.
> Today I contributed a patch to another Apache project I never
> contributed to before. The patch was utterly trivial: One word changed
> in a toString() method. It was created in less than 5 minutes. The patch
> was applied within less than 10 minutes!
> What I want to say by this is: It doesn't take much to make a difference
> on an open source project. The borders between user, contributor and
> committer are floating.


> I can understand why people are frustrated. I am, too.
> It's because something has changed within the last couple of month:
> Three committers who were heavily using James on a daily basis moved on.
> They were first hand testers of TRUNK.
> Instead, at the moment, TRUNK is largely untested. So nobody knows
> exactly how good it really is (or they don't report here).
> So if the community asks for a milestone release, we all must be aware
> of the fact that we then need to do actual testing on the released
> software. Otherwise, releasing a milestone serves no real purpose. So
> others need to jump in and test.


one of the conflicts is that james is both a final user application
and an extensible platform for developing mail applications

for users who are interested just in a plain mail application then
avalon-phoenix shouldn't be a problem. it works well and has been well
tested in production. 2.3.x really is the right choice.

the avalon-phoenix framework has major issues as a development
platform.  most developers prefer spring. the 3.x version is the right
choice for developers looking to extend james.

most of the developers who remain active are interested in developing
mail applications rather than creating and maintaining a basic user
email application.

IMHO both codebases are just too big for new developers. i would
prefer lots of smaller, more accessible libraries from which the two
versions are build.

if people aren't willing to contribute to testing 3.0 then one option
would be to think about 2.x as the stable, user application and 3.x as
the extensible developer version. it should be possible to extend
2.x's lifespan by factoring out libraries from 3.x to replace code in
2.x. avalon-pheonix support could then be dropped from 3.0.

- robert

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

View raw message