You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to server-dev@james.apache.org by "Noel J. Bergman" <no...@devtech.com> on 2003/01/10 07:22:59 UTC

James v2 versus v3

> Some of the Planned section of that page kind of seem like just general
> development that are necessary if we don't intend to release James 3.0
> for some time (things such as updates to redirect mailet, maybe the  new
> matchers).

> Not a big deal, but I would prefer to release James 3.0 sooner rather
> than later with whatever can be quickly agreed rather than wait too
> long.

IMO, James v3 is at least 6 months off from being stable, and probably close
to a year to a Release Build unless we get some additional developer
resources.  My expectation is that entire repository code will be replaced,
amongst other things.  The Mailet space classloader code will need to be
stable.  Etc.  These things take time.

James v2 is stable.  In my view, such features and fixes that can be made
within the stable code base without negatively impacting it ought to be
made, especially if they are forward compatible with v3.

On the other hand, I think that other things certainly should be defered to
James v3 in order to take advantage of its new features.  For example, I may
defer the GeoMatcher because I really want Matcher configuration for it, and
I don't know that it makes sense to do major Listserv work in James v2 when
James v3 will have a radical new respository system.

Maybe we are just talking labels, but to me the distinction is that James v3
has new API and new structures.  James v2 is the current stable code with no
structural (or risky) changes.

	--- Noel


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


RE: James v2 versus v3

Posted by "Noel J. Bergman" <no...@devtech.com>.
> James v2 is stable.  In my view, such features and fixes that can be made
> within the stable code base without negatively impacting it ought to be
> made, especially if they are forward compatible with v3.

Come to think of it, my list isn't really that long:

 * Update James to compile with GUMP against current Avalon CVS
 * GeoMatcher
 * RegexMatcher
 * Index on repository name (looks like v2.1 only does it for MySQL)
 * Thread isInterrupted() / InterruptedException changes
 * FetchPOP changes (Received header and configuration options)
 * DnsJava update
 * Updates to Redirect, and rewrite other forwarding mailets as Redirect
subclasses.
 * Fix Bounce method

All of these are pretty simple patches, except for some new matchers that I
have been working on, and the Redirect stuff.  No real "development", per
se.  I'm certainly open to discussion on them, and would defer some to James
v3 if people feel strongly about them.

	--- Noel


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