James was originally nothing but an MTA, expressly to implement the "mailet"
concept (defining a Java API for processing mail messages going through an
MTA). Since then, POP3 functionality was added, and Charles (and others?)
are working on IMAP functionality. Other people have been suggesting and
adding other features as well.
I've been using James as our MTA for almost 2 years now, although for quite
a while that was when it was still in beta. The code has had many, many
messages go through it and has been updated to deal with the real world of
SMTP and Mime messages instead of strictly what the specs say.
The mailet API gives James flexibility that few other MTAs have, although I
think people are only beginning to scratch the surface of this. At the same
time, some of the standard features aren't available or cleanly implemented
as other MTAs (message size restrictions, SMTP authentication, virtual
hosting, and other things). These are slowly getting addressed as people
have time and energy.
FYI, we hope to have a major release this summer, and the existing 1.2(rc1)
release is stable.
Serge Knystautas
Loki Technologies
http://www.lokitech.com/
----- Original Message -----
From: "John S. Gage" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, June 08, 2001 8:48 AM
Subject: Re: JAMES compared to other MTA's
> This is a very important question to me, because I was under the
impression
> that James was *not* a MTA. That, rather it was an IMAP implementation
> that would work *with* just about any MTA.
>
> Guidance, please.
>
> John
>
> At 12:56 AM 6/8/01, you wrote:
> >Is JAMES as good as other popular mail servers such as Postfix, Sendmail,
> >Qmail or is it still under development? I am looking for a mailserver
> >written in JAVA and I would like to know if JAMES could take the same
load
> >as any other popular MTA's.
> >
> >Thank you
> >Abjin
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
