On Tuesday, Aug 19, 2003, at 11:05 Europe/London, Danny Angus wrote:
I think perhaps you need to look at what is being done.
Alex is creating a copy of the API, he's *NOT* implementing it. If he implements the API thats fine, thats what we're here for.
I think that these comments are starting to get me down. I am at part 1 of a 3-part development cycle:
1) Make the API available with complete signatures, so that developers can compile against it for their mail code
2) Fully implement the API
3) Write transports/stores
It's on the published ToDo list, it's updated with where I am, and in the release of the initial code-base I said that I was working towards goal 3, but doing so via goals 1 and 2 first.
Personally, I'm now starting to wish that I hadn't released any code until I'd got to 3), which is essentially the one Danny is wanting. However, in the spirit of release-early, release-often I thought it would be a good idea to release part of the code as it made sense to do so, in my published work plan and wiki documented to-do list.
Further, now that the API is there, someone else (such as Danny :-) can start writing the transport/stores if he wants, because the foundations are now there for that to happen. However, if not, then it is something that I am working towards.
Bearing in mind that this is not a case of simply typing in interface method
signatures from the javadocs, why would creating and maintaining a copy of
the javaMail API be a worthwhile goal of this project, should we not be
focused on creating a world class implementation of it?
The majority of the methods in the API are, in fact, complete. There are (give or take) about 800 methods, of which there are only 100 or so left; just under 12% to go to reach 2).
I'm also curious as to why you keep using javaMail when the trademark is in fact JavaMail?
http://java.sun.com/products/javamail/
Alex.
