RE: James and NNTP Server. We should address this before 2.1 release.

["Noel J. Bergman" <no...@devtech.com>]

Harmeet,

I really don't see any point in delaying this release further to fix NNTP.
If that protocol is still broken, I would just as soon remove it from the
distribution until someone has time to do it properly.

Personally, I don't use NNTP with James, so I can't verify your unspecified
claims at this time, but if they are correct, let's just take NNTP out until
it can pass a protocol compliance test.

What specifically ARE the problems?  Basically your message, by your own
admission, is a rehashing of old wounds without telling us what bugs you
think are present in the current code.

If there are some defects, there have been MONTHS for someone to work on
NNTP.  No one did.  I proposed removing it before now, so if it still isn't
working right, let's just move the thing to proposals/ (or simply remove the
entry from config.xml entirely) and be done with it for now.  If you want to
prepare patches for NNTP based upon the current code base, please do so, and
we can re-enable NNTP in a 2.2 update, perhaps in late January.  I'll even
start using NNTP internally, so that I can check it, too.

As for your name, we've already agreed that ALL author tags will be removed
from the code.  This is community project, and everyone ought to take
responsibilty for all aspects.  Why is why I do find it annoying that you
would post a message rehashing old wounds, disparaging other contributors,
and not even mention the specific bugs that you feel are present.  I don't
find any of that beneficial to building our community.  Your note could (and
should) have been a matter of fact reporting of specific bugs that need to
be fixed.

	--- Noel


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>

Re: James and NNTP Server. We should address this before 2.1 release.

[Harmeet Bedi <ha...@kodemuse.com>]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Aaron Knauf" <ak...@xtra.co.nz>

> If NNTP does not work to a reasonable standard, then leave it out of the
> config (as Noel suggested).  Let people that are keen enough to hunt out
> the feature, cope with the bugs.

We should make progress not disable parts because of regressions and I don't
think this delays 2.1.

>
> Can we just get 2.1 out of the
> way, so I can scratch my itch?  Is there anything that I can do to get
> 2.1 out the door?

Sure hope so. Your itch is very valuable keep it going for some more.

Harmeet


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>

RE: James and NNTP Server. We should address this before 2.1 release.

["Noel J. Bergman" <no...@devtech.com>]

> JAMES has grabbed my interest, of late.  I am fairly keen on
> contributing some code to v3.  If people on this list insist on spending
> all of their time sniping at each other, then I might just bugger off to
> somewhere where the community is a little more oriented toward writing
> great code.

I can tell you with certainty that yours is not a unique view.  I find this
sort of personal attack of a contributor offensive.  Especially on the very
day that I was asked if someone was OK (because he's been quiet), and I
replied that he just wanted some quiet time.  The juxtaposition of the
inquiry and the attack is discomforting.

I am particularly concerned because I just received a private e-mail this
morning with a patch to fix a defect in an optional NNTP command (Thank You
to the contributor).  If Harmeet had documented the specific defect, we
might know if that patch fixed it.  However, it bothers me greatly that
someone would send a patch to me privately rather than post it to the
Community because of Harmeet.  THAT becomes a Community issue.

	--- Noel


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>

Re: James and NNTP Server. We should address this before 2.1 release.

[Aaron Knauf <ak...@xtra.co.nz>]

I thought we had had all this out?!  Would you guys just quit bickering! 
  I thought we were all going to be polite!

I am heartily sick of reading counter-productive "you guys are all crap" 
posts!

JAMES has grabbed my interest, of late.  I am fairly keen on 
contributing some code to v3.  If people on this list insist on spending 
all of their time sniping at each other, then I might just bugger off to 
somewhere where the community is a little more oriented toward writing 
great code.

If the latest build of JAMES pisses you off with the same old bug, then 
fix it and post a patch!  If others have a specific issue with the patch 
implementation, then they should either come up with a better solution, 
or get the hell out of the way!

If NNTP does not work to a reasonable standard, then leave it out of the 
config (as Noel suggested).  Let people that are keen enough to hunt out 
the feature, cope with the bugs.

I am itching to write the config stuff that I was talking about in an 
earlier post, while I have some time.  Can we just get 2.1 out of the 
way, so I can scratch my itch?  Is there anything that I can do to get 
2.1 out the door?  (I have already looked over the docs and posted one 
or two fixes.)

Cheers

ADK


Noel J. Bergman wrote:
> Harmeet,
> 
> I really don't see any point in delaying this release further to fix NNTP.
> If that protocol is still broken, I would just as soon remove it from the
> distribution until someone has time to do it properly.
> 
> Personally, I don't use NNTP with James, so I can't verify your unspecified
> claims at this time, but if they are correct, let's just take NNTP out until
> it can pass a protocol compliance test.
> 
> What specifically ARE the problems?  Basically your message, by your own
> admission, is a rehashing of old wounds without telling us what bugs you
> think are present in the current code.
> 
> If there are some defects, there have been MONTHS for someone to work on
> NNTP.  No one did.  I proposed removing it before now, so if it still isn't
> working right, let's just move the thing to proposals/ (or simply remove the
> entry from config.xml entirely) and be done with it for now.  If you want to
> prepare patches for NNTP based upon the current code base, please do so, and
> we can re-enable NNTP in a 2.2 update, perhaps in late January.  I'll even
> start using NNTP internally, so that I can check it, too.
> 
> As for your name, we've already agreed that ALL author tags will be removed
> from the code.  This is community project, and everyone ought to take
> responsibilty for all aspects.  Why is why I do find it annoying that you
> would post a message rehashing old wounds, disparaging other contributors,
> and not even mention the specific bugs that you feel are present.  I don't
> find any of that beneficial to building our community.  Your note could (and
> should) have been a matter of fact reporting of specific bugs that need to
> be fixed.
> 
> 	--- Noel
> 
> 
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
> 
> 


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>