On Thu, Jun 5, 2008 at 4:54 PM, Fred Moore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > This little gem is extremely well hidden in Apache-land AFAICT, no web site, > no wiki, no roadmap, ...
Agreed, since I'm now a commons commiter as well I guess I should actually do something about it :-) > We are tempted to go for it but before doing so, we were wandering whether > you could share with us your opinions about this component in terms of > stability, maturity, compliance with RFCs, etc... For basic FTP functionality it's very good, we have had very few issues where their interpretation of the RFC has differed from ours, and in most cases it's been our fault. For FTPS, it's brand new in the 2.0 branch and here we've seen more issues albeit nothing really serious. In our test kit we probably exercise more features than you would normally do in a typical client. > plus suggest any > particular snapshot/tag of the codebase which you deem it can be trusted > more that the others (we are after compliance and stability more than > bleeding edge features). Since the 2.0 branch is pretty much targeted for a near-future release, not a lot of development is going on. Instead it's focused on stability and bug fixing. So, I would say that you should go for the latest trunk. If you don't want to aim at a moving target, lock down the latest version and use that. > I know this post is better suited for the commons.net mailing list, but your > personal opinion would be highly appreciated. I'm on [EMAIL PROTECTED] as well, so any list is fine if you want to catch me :-) /niklas
