On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 11:24 AM, Demetrios Kyriakis <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> Just out of curiosity: is JAMES server dead? >>>> >>>> not really >>>> >>>> the 2.x code base is now mature with active development continuing on >>>> the more advanced 3.0 codebase (eg >>>> http://www.ohloh.net/p/apache-james/analyses/latest) >>> >>> I see lots of "refactorings", but not sure about actual functionality >>> for the user >>> itself in the *last year*. If I recall right, one year ago the most >>> important functionalities( simple virtual hosting, and add hosts without >>> restart) were already there. >>> >>>>> - 2 years since the latest minor release of the server >>>>> - no visible intention what-so-ever to do a new release (from the >>>>> community >>>>> perspective - in fact when new users ask about it, they're replied to >>>>> do it >>>>> by themselves) >>>> >>>> if the community wants a release of the server code base (whether 2.x >>>> or 3.x) then people need to step up and start contributing towards >>>> that goal >>> >>> Just my point :) : "When users ask about a release, they're replied to do >>> do it by themselves" :) . >>> >>> So let me get this straight: you are basically 12 gurus (or at least >>> very advanced - expert developers): >>> http://james.apache.org/weare.html >>> And during/after 2 years, you need the "help" of simple *users* just to >>> get out a release? >>> Wow, just wow. If that's not an abandoned project, I don't know what it >>> is :(. >> >> It's a matter of contribution. For example, I don't have much time to >> contribute to the project ATM. Some of the others also don't have time >> left to do so. So the 12 people are down to 2-3. >> >> This is an open community project. Apache is a do-acracy. >> >> Releasing is much more than writing code. It's also about building, >> testing, bug fixing and documenting. >> >> If you want something to happen, do it. > > I saw this coming :). > My short answer is NO :). > To new users this doesn't sound like "do-acracy", but like "lazy-cracy" or > politics. > Let me explain: everyone should be responsible for his "own" open source > project (that it's putting or not in his own CV), i.e. the two basic roles > should be still available: users and developers: > - I'm a JAMES user, the Apache team are the "developers". The same way, > I'm a "developer" in other projects, where you would be "users" (if you > would need those open source projects).
that's not a developer - that's a maintainer. apache doesn't use that particular development model. the apache view is a little different. there are committers, PMCers and members all of which have earnt karma, plus developers and contributors who are earning it. then there's the wider community who show up on lists. by showing up on the list and trying to kick the committers into creating a new 2.x release, you've become a contributor. this is the first step :-) > Of course, if a "user" would want "special" things (and has the required > abilities), it would eventually become a "developer" (after a while), but > not from the start and for sure not for a simple release? if the wider community wants a release then people need to become more active (this is a good start BTW) > Also consider that most of your uses are not Java developers, but users > that want a more secure enterprise email solution - many coming here because > the saw Apache HTTPd was good and very secure, so they think email server > must be as well - considering how hard configure right are many of the > native email solutions. So urging them to contribute before they even can > get started, is simply not fair. if you want mature and secure, you need to 2.x code base which has reasonable documentation but more contributions gratefully accepted > For your users, this is the same chicken-egg problem like with the > documentation(found in quite a few Apache projects - not this one however) - > new users ask for documentation to be able to start at all, and they're > replied to contribute - but they can't cause they're not at that level yet - > they would need *the* documentation to get there where they could contribute > at all. if you want to use 3.x then IMO you really need to be an active contributor to the community. AIUI most 3.x deployments are forks, and the codebase is neither mature nor production proved. so yes, it's a chicken-and-egg situation with 3.x - it won't be ready for release until it's been proved in production but it's unlikely to be proved until it's more widely used. - robert --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
