commons-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Mark R. Diggory" <>
Subject Re: [net] Why use Net for SMTP?
Date Sun, 04 Jan 2004 18:14:24 GMT
I just finished writing a "sendmail" transport for JavaMail. It simply 
uses System runtime to exec the sendmail executable. Thus, one can use 
sendmail on a linux box as a transport without actually running a SMTP port.

I was earlier discussing on the James list, "Would it be possible to 
programmatically access the James API as a MUA/MTA such that it could 
facilitate the steps required to send a SMTP message using the same 
strategy as sendmail (resolving MX records, etc)?" As such, a JavaMail 
SMTP transport could be written which doesn't require a local SMTP 
server running.

Which didn't get very far in discussion. But, I still think its a viable 

To be argumentative as usual. ;-) Is licensing really a viable reason to
reimplement JavaMail functionality? Sun does provide legal means to 
redistribute the binary's for JavaMail as part of a package/application 
in their licensing agreement. And if Apache Licensing can't play well 
with private code like this, it kind of defeats its purpose as a more 
legitimate open source licensing strategy for commercial needs than GPL?

> 2. License to Distribute Software. Subject to the terms and
> conditions of this Agreement, including, but not limited to Section 3
> (Java (TM) Technology Restrictions) of these Supplemental Terms, Sun
> grants you a non-exclusive, non-transferable, limited license to
> reproduce and distribute the Software in binary code form only,
> provided that (i) you distribute the Software complete and unmodified
> and only bundled as part of, and for the sole purpose of  running,
> your Java applets or applications ("Programs"), (ii) the Programs add
> significant and primary functionality to the Software, (iii) you do
> not distribute additional software intended to replace any
> component(s) of the Software, (iv) you do not remove or alter any
> proprietary legends or notices contained in the Software, (v) you
> only distribute the Software subject to a license agreement that
> protects Sun's interests consistent with the terms contained in this
> Agreement, and (vi) you agree to defend and indemnify Sun and its
> licensors from and against any damages, costs, liabilities,
> settlement amounts and/or expenses (including attorneys' fees)
> incurred in connection with any claim, lawsuit or action by any third
> party that arises or results from the use or distribution of any and
> all Programs and/or Software.

Alternatively, if there is already solid SMTP/POP protocol handling code 
present in James, and developers want to make that available for other 
Apache projects to access programmatically (say, to build a "sendmail 
like" transporter thats platform independent). Then porting that code 
into [net] does make some sense.


Paul Libbrecht wrote:

> At least to my taste, the better license is worth it. (we should be
> able to compare Sun licenses to Apache ones and in general Apache
> surely wins, trouble is someone has to understand Sun licenses deeply
> to be able to provide such a comparison).
> Also I think the implementations in Commons-Net are much more 
> straightforward (and thus require less set-up) than java-mail. For
> example, I don't think it is possible in JavaMail to invoke a 
> pop-store without a backing set of files... (really a guess).
> Paul
> On 4-Jan-04, at 05:30 Uhr, Henri Yandell wrote:
>> As the FAQ/Wiki doesn't mention anything on this yet, why would I
>> want to use Commons Net for SMTP when a perfectly standard
>> implementation exists for SMTP in Sun's JavaMail?
>> Same question for POP.
>> Is it just the better licence, or does Commons NET do a better job
>> in some way?
>> Hen
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>  To unsubscribe, e-mail: 
> For additional commands, e-mail:

Mark Diggory
Software Developer
Harvard MIT Data Center

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message