On Jan 29, 2008 8:45 AM, Bernd Fondermann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > > Since we have so many road blocks on our track ahead... why don't we > simply start a rewrite?
we already have: it's called trunk ;-) > Before we all throw in our -1's, let's just think about it for a minute... > > Truely, coding the current stuff is _no_fun_. How do we expect this > project to gain track if nobody is volunteering for coping with this pain? > We have _not_enough_long_term_committers able and willing to deal with > legacy stuff. The world has _moved_on_. Can't we build something which > is comprehensible? The whole backend repository architecture and how > things are propagated, well, I don't get it and I think it'd better be > replaced. And I don't even figure out how to replace stuff there. > Whenever I look at this stuff I start with... putting it away. > Many important features from the last couple of months could (IMHO) not > be integrated seamlessly. Because current JAMES is not easily extensible > and generally does not welcome changes. We have some cool ideas like > async handlers etc. And people invest their time trying to fit it into > the current architecture, where this energy is better spent writing even > more cool features and making the server unbreakable. We have tight > integration with JavaMail. This alone has probably cost us so much time. i'm willing to live with the old architecture since it allows me to run a partially complete solutions what would be to interesting to know is what stuff people would find fun to work on (we should be able to find a way to have fun whilst retaining the mature code) > Yes, we have a responsability, to make things easy for our users, > support migrations, be defensive with changing APIs and so on. But how > does that help if we are unable to push this dinosaur forward? Or > foremost responsability is to make this a fun place to be, make people > contribute and hand out fine releases. I think we have come to a > situation where we might be better off with creating something new from > scratch. i see things a little differently: there's just too much in JAMES to recreate it from scratch. IMHO what matters is being able to easily create new components from scratchy. - robert --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
