JavaMail API

["Alan D. Cabrera" <ad...@toolazydogs.com>]

Why is this in the sandbox?  I would like to use it.

 

 

Regards,

Alan

 

 

Re: JavaMail API

["Geir Magnusson Jr." <ge...@apache.org>]

On Oct 9, 2004, at 11:23 AM, Jeremy Boynes wrote:

> David Jencks wrote:
>> If I remember the discussions correctly, it is in the sandbox because 
>> it is incomplete, is not currently spec compliant, and the javamail 
>> api is not well separated from implementing javamail itself, so you 
>> would essentially have to implement all of the javamail functionality 
>>  to make it usable.  I could be wrong on this, I haven't looked into 
>> these issues myself.  I'm sure if you finish it up everyone will be 
>> thrilled.
>
> There are also concerns about whether this API can actually be 
> implemented from the specification - there are a lot of concrete 
> classes  in the API whose behaviour may not be sufficiently 
> documented. I remember extensive discussions last year on the 
> correctness of "equals" vs. what the RI actually does.
>
> On the other hand, we have to have an implementation of both the 
> JavaMail and Activation APIs and we cannot redistribute Sun's due to 
> licensing restrictions. Perhaps the time as come to finish this work, 
> run it through the CTS and then work with Sun to clarify the 
> Specifications.
>
> Another issue is that the JAXR specification depends on Activation so 
> procuding its spec API will have a dependency issue.
>
> I'd say let's move these back out of the sandbox and get going.

I'll be happy to take these on as my own and get started.  I can use 
this to help work the JavaMail issue with Sun.  I've been working on 
that for a while, and I think the licensing change is hopeless at this 
point, being that the removal of indemnification is probably 
impossible.

However, there is possible strategy that worked with JAXP, and that is 
to not have them totally 'hand over' the software, but instead give us 
a copy to be the core of our 'independent implementation'.  That way, 
they keep the RI, are "the source" for the technology, and we get a 
functional copy to keep going with.

Until our version is function (or we get JavaMail and JAF from Sun), 
lets do this - because this is needed for our certification testing, 
and not currently for general users, lets just use the real JM and JAF 
jars from sun privately on our local machines.  It's a minor pain for 
those of us that care, and doesn't affect the rest of the world.

geir

>
> --
> Jeremy
>
>
-- 
Geir Magnusson Jr                                  +1-203-665-6437
geirm@apache.org

Re: JavaMail API

[Jeremy Boynes <jb...@gluecode.com>]

David Jencks wrote:
> If I remember the discussions correctly, it is in the sandbox because it 
> is incomplete, is not currently spec compliant, and the javamail api is 
> not well separated from implementing javamail itself, so you would 
> essentially have to implement all of the javamail functionality  to make 
> it usable.  I could be wrong on this, I haven't looked into these issues 
> myself.  I'm sure if you finish it up everyone will be thrilled.
> 

There are also concerns about whether this API can actually be 
implemented from the specification - there are a lot of concrete classes 
  in the API whose behaviour may not be sufficiently documented. I 
remember extensive discussions last year on the correctness of "equals" 
vs. what the RI actually does.

On the other hand, we have to have an implementation of both the 
JavaMail and Activation APIs and we cannot redistribute Sun's due to 
licensing restrictions. Perhaps the time as come to finish this work, 
run it through the CTS and then work with Sun to clarify the Specifications.

Another issue is that the JAXR specification depends on Activation so 
procuding its spec API will have a dependency issue.

I'd say let's move these back out of the sandbox and get going.

--
Jeremy

Re: JavaMail API

[David Jencks <dj...@gluecode.com>]

If I remember the discussions correctly, it is in the sandbox because 
it is incomplete, is not currently spec compliant, and the javamail api 
is not well separated from implementing javamail itself, so you would 
essentially have to implement all of the javamail functionality  to 
make it usable.  I could be wrong on this, I haven't looked into these 
issues myself.  I'm sure if you finish it up everyone will be thrilled.

david jencks

On Oct 9, 2004, at 7:55 AM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:

> Why is this in the sandbox?  I would like to use it.
>
>  
>
>  
>
> Regards,
>
> Alan
>
>  
>
>