Hi Mark,
thanks for the comments !
More inline
Mark Webb wrote:
I agree with everything that you all have said here. The one thing I
would add is about the documentation/tutorials. I look around at some
other projects and sometimes the documentation is better, sometimes
its worse. Focusing on the better projects, the documentation is
spot-on professional. I have been working with ActiveMQ lately and
the whole idea of the Enterprise Integration Patterns (EIP) is
fantastic.
AFAIK, ctiveMQ has been heavily backed by IONA, who paid some peeps to
work on it, as they are offering Fuse, an enterprise version of
ActiveMQ. THis may explain the quality of ActiveMQ site.
It shows use cases and associated documentation. I think
this is what we need. If you want an SMTP server do this, if you want
an FTP server do that. The list goes on and on.
Agreed.
I think part of the problem with documentation is that the learning
curve on the MINA internals is steep. I have been on the project for
a couple years and only in the last 4-6 months can I say that I really
understand the entire system. This makes it tough for people to dive
in an help.
That's so true ! And the overly complexity of the code, when you think
that it's a small code base (45 KSlocs, out of which the core is
33KSlocs) is killing us, specially when you have sparce doc/javadoc.
--
--
cordialement, regards,
Emmanuel Lécharny
www.iktek.com
directory.apache.org
