On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 3:23 PM, Robert Burrell Donkin <[email protected]> wrote: > 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.
Then you have to cut an alpha release (and if no one evaluates the alpha you're doomed). IMHO a release should at least be a goal of the project. "Release early, release often." Cheers, Markus --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
