+1 (redundant with prior vote).
I'd like to suggest changes to the wording of the documents. Sample changes are
below. I am in the process of merging my changes from Friday into the current
documents. If there are no objections to the approach expressed by these changes,
I'll commit the full documents for review when I get back in and can finish them later
today.
My changes are primarily two-fold:
(a) incorporate the existing evolution towards a unified
electronic messaging server.
(b) eliminate the negative references to Jakarta, and
focus on the positive reasons for TLP status.
We are not trying to be a server for all purposes, but we do have a mechanism for
plugging in protocol providers that can share a common infrastructure, and are within
the basic domain of electronic messages. And we have discussed each of the above
protocols favorably, plus the new Fetch/FetchMail/FetchMessages service is capable of
supporting any protocol for which JavaMail has a provider, e.g., proprietary web mail
protocols. We do not, for example, support a request / response model like HTTP, but
we do support multiple send, store, deliver and retrieve protocols and message content
formats.
Accordingly ...
- replace "the Apache James E-Mail server and the Apache Mailet API" with "electronic
messaging based upon IETF protocols (e.g. SMTP, POP3, IMAP, NNTP, XMPP)"
- replace "James is a 100% Java mail and news server." with "James is a 100% Java
mail and news server, evolving into a complete electronic messaging solution that
integrates the range of IETF protocols, such as SMTP, POP3, IMAP, NNTP, and XMPP with
unified user account management and open storage mechanisms."
- replace "processing of mail and news messages." with "processing of electronic
messages."
With respect to the positive reasons for TLP status:
- replace the General section with:
"James is a mature, self-determining project that is able to govern itself under the
auspices of the ASF Board in accordance with ASF bylaws and guidelines.
As James consists primarily of the server, which is an end-user product, we feel that
top level project status, emphasisng its function rather than its platform, would suit
James well. Top level project status would also facilitate the ability to position
the Mailet API as a separate specification, of which James would represent a reference
implementation.
James will continue to work closely with the Avalon Project, and is establishing ties
with other ASF projects, such as Cocoon and BSF, to integrate some of their
technologies within James."
- Remove the first paragraph from Project Management, and add this to the bottom of
the section:
"We believe think that normalising our relationship with the ASF Board by becoming a
direct subordinate rather than indirectly reporting through Jakarta, and taking
official control of all the issues we currently inherit and "interpret" from Jakarta,
would benefit James."
Those are the basic kinds of changes I'm making. I think that focusing on the
positive aspects of being a TLP is more important than reasons for leaving Jakarta,
and I think that the broader mention of electronic messaging is little more than a
proper recognition of what we already are doing. We have stayed true to our mission
by usefully and properly broadening the scope of James.
--- Noel
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
