geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Alex Blewitt <Alex.Blew...@ioshq.com>
Subject [PMC] FAO PMC re: JavaMail and Alex Blewitt
Date Wed, 20 Aug 2003 21:37:39 GMT
I have a couple of questions for Geronimo's PMC:

1) What is the official Geronimo decision regarding a clean-room 
implementation of JavaMail's API? Are we happy to invest the time in 
(a) building, and (b) maintaining such a product to avoid licensing 
issues with (re)distribution of Sun's API reference code? As well as 
licensing, ease-of-use should come into consideration as well; a J2EE 
server that requires you to download extra components whilst installing 
may not be seen as user-friendly as one that comes all-in.

2) On Saturday, Jason Dillon proposed a [Vote] to allow me commit 
rights to the repository [1]. (I'm guessing that this means a +1 :-). 
However, the only person who responded was Greg Wilkins [2] who 
abstained from that vote, given that I am not an existing ASF member. 
Did people not respond to the [Vote] on the grounds that it got buried 
in all the weekend's mail, or is such a non-response automatically 
counted as an abstention? And how long a timescale is it before the 
[Vote] is considered closed (and thus everyone who has not yet 
responded is automatically abstained)? FWIW I have signed the ASF2 
agreement, but failed succesfully to scan it since the fax number rang 
out when I called it. (I have it as a PDF anyway, so can always e-mail 
it if that is acceptable).

I hope that you can answer these questions and give me guidance 
regarding the recent [JavaMail] discussions regarding whether to 
continue re-implementing the API or to junk it in favour of using the 
binary build downloaded from Sun.

Thanks,

Alex.

[1] http://nagoya.apache.org/eyebrowse/ReadMsg?listId=140&msgNo=1775
[2] http://nagoya.apache.org/eyebrowse/ReadMsg?listId=140&msgNo=1851


Mime
View raw message