You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@httpd.apache.org by rb...@covalent.net on 2001/07/02 23:38:00 UTC
New Protocol module, POP3
Hi everybody,
in my spare time I have been working on a POP3 protocol module for Apache
2.0. It is almost complete (fully protocol compliant, but I know of at
least two bugs). I want to fix the two bugs that I know of, because they
stop the server from being useful, and then I want to Open Source it.
There is still word to be done to this module to make it better, like
making it support the CAPA command, and thus SSL.
So, the question that I have is does the group want this? If so, do we
put it in the httpd-2.0 tree, or do we put it in it's own tree?
If the group doesn't want it, I am likely to just go to sourceforge to
make this project open, so it will still be released, it's just a question
of how I do it now.
Ryan
_____________________________________________________________________________
Ryan Bloom rbb@apache.org
Covalent Technologies rbb@covalent.net
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Re: New Protocol module, POP3
Posted by Brian Moon <br...@dealnews.com>.
I may not be in the "group", but I think that any code that protocol modules
for major protocols like POP3, IMAP, FTP, etc. could/should be maintained
and supported within the Apache system.
However, it should not be in the httpd tree. I think what we are seeing is
that Apache 2.0 is not the httpd server as the tree and packages suggest.
Apache 2.0 is more than an httpd server. This code is an example of that.
Of course, the argument can be made that the Apache Group does not want to
be involved with other servers than httpd. That is not for me to say.
Brian Moon
------------------------------------------
dealnews.com, Inc.
Makers of dealnews & dealmac
http://dealnews.com/ | http://dealmac.com/
----- Original Message -----
From: <rb...@covalent.net>
To: <ne...@apache.org>
Sent: Monday, July 02, 2001 4:38 PM
Subject: New Protocol module, POP3
>
> Hi everybody,
>
> in my spare time I have been working on a POP3 protocol module for Apache
> 2.0. It is almost complete (fully protocol compliant, but I know of at
> least two bugs). I want to fix the two bugs that I know of, because they
> stop the server from being useful, and then I want to Open Source it.
> There is still word to be done to this module to make it better, like
> making it support the CAPA command, and thus SSL.
>
> So, the question that I have is does the group want this? If so, do we
> put it in the httpd-2.0 tree, or do we put it in it's own tree?
>
> If the group doesn't want it, I am likely to just go to sourceforge to
> make this project open, so it will still be released, it's just a question
> of how I do it now.
>
> Ryan
>
____________________________________________________________________________
_
> Ryan Bloom rbb@apache.org
> Covalent Technologies rbb@covalent.net
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
>
>
>
>
Re: New Protocol module, POP3
Posted by rb...@covalent.net.
I'll try to clean it up a bit this week, and post a link to it by the end
of the week. :-)
Ryan
On Mon, 2 Jul 2001, Bill Stoddard wrote:
> Cool! I am certainly interested in using it. Dunno yet about making it an ASF project.
>
> Bill
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <rb...@covalent.net>
> To: <ne...@apache.org>
> Sent: Monday, July 02, 2001 5:38 PM
> Subject: New Protocol module, POP3
>
>
> >
> > Hi everybody,
> >
> > in my spare time I have been working on a POP3 protocol module for Apache
> > 2.0. It is almost complete (fully protocol compliant, but I know of at
> > least two bugs). I want to fix the two bugs that I know of, because they
> > stop the server from being useful, and then I want to Open Source it.
> > There is still word to be done to this module to make it better, like
> > making it support the CAPA command, and thus SSL.
> >
> > So, the question that I have is does the group want this? If so, do we
> > put it in the httpd-2.0 tree, or do we put it in it's own tree?
> >
> > If the group doesn't want it, I am likely to just go to sourceforge to
> > make this project open, so it will still be released, it's just a question
> > of how I do it now.
> >
> > Ryan
> > _____________________________________________________________________________
> > Ryan Bloom rbb@apache.org
> > Covalent Technologies rbb@covalent.net
> > -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >
>
>
>
_____________________________________________________________________________
Ryan Bloom rbb@apache.org
Covalent Technologies rbb@covalent.net
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Re: New Protocol module, POP3
Posted by Bill Stoddard <bi...@wstoddard.com>.
Cool! I am certainly interested in using it. Dunno yet about making it an ASF project.
Bill
----- Original Message -----
From: <rb...@covalent.net>
To: <ne...@apache.org>
Sent: Monday, July 02, 2001 5:38 PM
Subject: New Protocol module, POP3
>
> Hi everybody,
>
> in my spare time I have been working on a POP3 protocol module for Apache
> 2.0. It is almost complete (fully protocol compliant, but I know of at
> least two bugs). I want to fix the two bugs that I know of, because they
> stop the server from being useful, and then I want to Open Source it.
> There is still word to be done to this module to make it better, like
> making it support the CAPA command, and thus SSL.
>
> So, the question that I have is does the group want this? If so, do we
> put it in the httpd-2.0 tree, or do we put it in it's own tree?
>
> If the group doesn't want it, I am likely to just go to sourceforge to
> make this project open, so it will still be released, it's just a question
> of how I do it now.
>
> Ryan
> _____________________________________________________________________________
> Ryan Bloom rbb@apache.org
> Covalent Technologies rbb@covalent.net
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
Re: New Protocol module, POP3
Posted by Jeff Trawick <tr...@attglobal.net>.
rbb@covalent.net writes:
> So, the question that I have is does the group want this? If so, do we
> put it in the httpd-2.0 tree, or do we put it in it's own tree?
my votes...
in? yes
httpd-2.0 tree? no
own tree on apache.org? yes
> If the group doesn't want it, I am likely to just go to sourceforge to
> make this project open, so it will still be released, it's just a question
> of how I do it now.
sourceforge is probably fine in general but I think it is good for us
to distribute another protocol module... if this were the 3rd or 4th
such non-HTTP submission I'd probably have different feelings
--
Jeff Trawick | trawick@attglobal.net | PGP public key at web site:
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Park/9289/
Born in Roswell... married an alien...
Re: New Protocol module, POP3
Posted by Justin Erenkrantz <je...@ebuilt.com>.
On Mon, Jul 02, 2001 at 06:48:12PM -0400, Cliff Woolley wrote:
> On Tue, 3 Jul 2001, Sander Striker wrote:
>
> > tsk tsk doesn't anybody here ever stop working? :)
> >
> > Lets start off with saying this is _very_ cool.
> >
> > I can't speak for the group, and I don't know what my voice is worth
> > at this point in time, but I would suggest putting it in its own tree.
> >
> > If at all possible, I would like projects like these to remain at
> > the apache site. It is projects like these who pave the way to make
> > apache a true server framework.
>
>
> I agree 100% with all of Sander's comments. =-)
+1 (aka me too).
Maybe create a "extra modules" repository that just have little,
potentially helpful modules for Apache. Maybe maintained, maybe
not.
FWIW, mod_mbox could use an "official" home too (see
http://www.apachelabs.org). -- justin
RE: New Protocol module, POP3
Posted by Cliff Woolley <cl...@yahoo.com>.
On Tue, 3 Jul 2001, Sander Striker wrote:
> tsk tsk doesn't anybody here ever stop working? :)
>
> Lets start off with saying this is _very_ cool.
>
> I can't speak for the group, and I don't know what my voice is worth
> at this point in time, but I would suggest putting it in its own tree.
>
> If at all possible, I would like projects like these to remain at
> the apache site. It is projects like these who pave the way to make
> apache a true server framework.
I agree 100% with all of Sander's comments. =-)
--Cliff
--------------------------------------------------------------
Cliff Woolley
cliffwoolley@yahoo.com
Charlottesville, VA
RE: New Protocol module, POP3
Posted by Sander Striker <st...@apache.org>.
> Hi everybody,
Hi Ryan,
> In my spare time I have been working
tsk tsk doesn't anybody here ever stop working? :)
> on a POP3 protocol module for Apache 2.0.
Lets start off with saying this is _very_ cool.
> It is almost complete (fully protocol compliant, but I know of at
> least two bugs). I want to fix the two bugs that I know of, because they
> stop the server from being useful, and then I want to Open Source it.
> There is still word to be done to this module to make it better, like
> making it support the CAPA command, and thus SSL.
>
> So, the question that I have is does the group want this? If so, do we
> put it in the httpd-2.0 tree, or do we put it in it's own tree?
I can't speak for the group, and I don't know what my voice is worth
at this point in time, but I would suggest putting it in its own tree.
> If the group doesn't want it, I am likely to just go to sourceforge to
> make this project open, so it will still be released, it's just a question
> of how I do it now.
If at all possible, I would like projects like these to remain at
the apache site. It is projects like these who pave the way to make
apache a true server framework.
> Ryan
Sander