I may not be in the "group", but I think that any code that protocol modules
for major protocols like POP3, IMAP, FTP, etc. could/should be maintained
and supported within the Apache system.
However, it should not be in the httpd tree. I think what we are seeing is
that Apache 2.0 is not the httpd server as the tree and packages suggest.
Apache 2.0 is more than an httpd server. This code is an example of that.
Of course, the argument can be made that the Apache Group does not want to
be involved with other servers than httpd. That is not for me to say.
Brian Moon
------------------------------------------
dealnews.com, Inc.
Makers of dealnews & dealmac
http://dealnews.com/ | http://dealmac.com/
----- Original Message -----
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, July 02, 2001 4:38 PM
Subject: New Protocol module, POP3
>
> Hi everybody,
>
> in my spare time I have been working on a POP3 protocol module for Apache
> 2.0. It is almost complete (fully protocol compliant, but I know of at
> least two bugs). I want to fix the two bugs that I know of, because they
> stop the server from being useful, and then I want to Open Source it.
> There is still word to be done to this module to make it better, like
> making it support the CAPA command, and thus SSL.
>
> So, the question that I have is does the group want this? If so, do we
> put it in the httpd-2.0 tree, or do we put it in it's own tree?
>
> If the group doesn't want it, I am likely to just go to sourceforge to
> make this project open, so it will still be released, it's just a question
> of how I do it now.
>
> Ryan
>
____________________________________________________________________________
_
> Ryan Bloom [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Covalent Technologies [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
>
>
>
>
