> I think you might be missing the big picture. James > is already (I stand corrected, it's not dead) in idle > mode. My feeling is that new development cannot > happen with the current committers not committing > anything. Unless they let other (active) developers > in, they are nothing more than sourceforge-squatters. > Case study: FreeBSD vs. DragonflyBSD.
Check svn, last commit 12 days ago by Vincenzo, before that 2 weeks by Noel. Sure (some/all) of the committers might not be actively developing james, but they do commit patches with a bit of gentle persuasion :) > Could you please elaborate? If you are defending the > Avalon beast, I have nothing to add. Except, that > having to rely on deprecated components is not a good > thing and does tarnish James's image. James is stable, and I'd like to see it stay that way. I don't see a problem with relying on depreciated components when they are open source. They work. They have a proven track record. Sure, there wont be any development, but they work stably as is. If there's any urgent need to change anything in them, they're open source! On the other hand, I don't like avalon - never figured it out. I do like the new wave of CDI containers using POJOs, because there really is very little you need to know about how they work, containers, etc to use them. I think this is definitely (and I don't think there are any arguments here) the where the next major branch of james should be heading. (I think I would put this before new features like IMAP, better virtual domains support, etc, etc.) Sadly I don't have much time to work on these things, at the moment I am working on a new mailing list system for james. When that is finished (maybe I should say if...) I will give it to the project for possible inclusion in james. Daniel. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
