On Mon, 2020-06-08 at 21:28 +0900, David Leangen wrote: > > > […] it's a good occasion to gather people opinions about that and > > > move forward with James as a project. > > > > > > So, what do you think ? > > My 2 yen: > > My impression of James is that it is already much too > overcomplicated.
Agree > It seems to me that a major refactoring ought to take place at some > point. Well, we could argue we are in a several years long refactoring now. You should look at code from 6 years old, you'll understand what I mean. Don't wait for the refactoring-will-make-everything-easier to happen: it won't anytime soon. > > Scala could be introduced, but it should be done so very cautiously. > I have nothing at all against Scala or any other language. I do have > a lot of grudges against unnecessary complications, though. > > <tangent> > At this time in the code base, there are java classes that depend on > some Scala classes. This means that I am **forced** to get Scala > working just so I can compile James. However, at this time I am > unable to do it in Eclipse, despite several hours of investigation, > due to the current weird state of Scala development. Not good for me. > > If it were the opposite (Scala depended on the Java code base), then > I could simply ignore the Scala, get the Java code working in my IDE, > and at least be able to do *something* with the code base. > </tangent> Well, I understand that IDE support is lacking but Scala rather remove complexity otherwise we would not start using it. I agree that it's not welcoming to people when IDE is not working in a few steps but it's something we can expect to get solved in the near future. > My point is that (1) the “core” should remain in Java alone, not > because Java is so awesome but simply just to avoid unnecessary > complexity, Well, one should not confuse `complex` with `familiar`. Java is `familiar` to many people but is way more complex than Scala in many ways. > and (2) any other JVM language could happy co-exist, but should not > create a dependency (i.e. it could happy sit atop the core without > disrupting anybody). > For now we settled for Scala in component and extensions, not in core. Thank you for your feedback. Cheers, -- Matthieu --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-dev-unsubscr...@james.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: server-dev-h...@james.apache.org
