geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stefano Bagnara <>
Subject Re: Geronimo-JAMES integration
Date Mon, 16 Jun 2008 10:45:42 GMT
David Jencks ha scritto:
> I've been hoping for a Geronimo-JAMES integration since the start of the 
> Geronimo project.  Two fairly recent developments in JAMES have now made 
> this a relatively simple task:  the maven build and the spring 
> integration code.
> [...]
> Instructions:
> 1. Apply patches for JAMES-840, 841, and 842 to james trunk.  Get all 
> the jars needed for the build into the private stage repository 
> (JAMES-840).  (I realize these instructions are unclear but they are the 
> best I have at the moment)

I really hope we can tweak them and apply all of them. I commented each 
issue on JIRA.

> 2. Build JAMES with maven
> mvn clean install -Plocal

If the maven build is not acceptable to our PMC another approach could 
be to add a maven repository install script to the ant build.
Of course I would prefer if our PMC accept that people may prefer maven 
to build our products.

> 3. Build geronimo trunk (I haven't checked to see if sufficiently up to 
> date geronimo snapshots are available.  We also have some private repo 
> issues that may make at least one local build of geronimo necessary).


> 4. check out
> svn co

I see there are 3 modules for that project:

can you explain (I don't know anything about "car" module type) ?

Is there anything you think should be moved to james project instead of 

> 5. build james plugin
> mvn clean install -Pwith-assembly
> 6. Fire up the sample server
> cd james-server/target
> tar xzf james-server-1.0-SNAPSHOT-bin.tar.gz
> ./james-server-1.0-SNAPSHOT/bin/gsh geronimo/start-server
> I've put the james config files in a geronimo-standard location of 
> var/james/config.  I changed the ports so the server would start without 
> superuser permissions.  So far I just know the server starts without 
> errors: I haven't figure out how to test if it can actually do anything.

It looks like really simple!

> -----------------------------------
> Future directions
> Even in its current state this plugin/integration is only viable if the 
> JAMES community
> - works to resolve the issues noted in JAMES-840, 841, 842
> - continues to maintain the maven build


> Currently there is minimal integration between geronimo and JAMES.   One 
> really obvious integration point would be to use geroniimo supplied 
> datasources.  However glancing at the code there appears to be a certain 
> amount of fishing for configuration rather than dependency injection.  
> I'm wondering whether there is any interest in moving to JPA based 
> database access, and whether this would be significantly harder than 
> just changing the datasource source.  Obviously this would imply moving 
> JAMES to java 5.


Moving to java 5 IMHO is no more an issue: as soon as a feature will 
require java 5 we should simply stop declaring 1.4 compatibility: I 
don't know anyone using an 1.4 jvm at this point.

> Another issue I came across is use of com.sun mail classes (I started by 
> trying to use the geronimo mail provider before I understood why the 
> stage repo wasn't working for me).  Is this intentional?  Are you 
> interested in also supporting the geronimo mail implementation?

It is intentional. Last time I checked it geronimo mail implementation 
was not enough for our delivery needs. There is a lot to change and we 
would probably stop using javamail at all, instead of supporting 
geronimo implementation for the remote delivery task. This is only my 
opinion, of course.

> Finally I came across some comments that DNS is needed (as you can 
> probably tell I know almost nothing about mail).  I wondered if any 
> thought had been given to using apacheds in-vm for this.

We don't need a DNS server, just DNS lookup capabilities. We don't use 
the JVM built-in DNS lookup mechanism because of issues in the caching 
and expiration support. apacheds does not provide a dns client library.

At the moment the geronimo-james integration is simply a single gbean 
for the whole james application: do you think it would be hard to 
support 1 gbean per function? JAMES is composed by api modules, library 
modules and function modules. functions only depends on libraries and 
api, libraries only on apis, and api have no internal dependencies.
deployments simply aggregate functions. Is it possible to create 
separate GBean for functions only when functions depends on shared 
services or the only solution is to publish 1 gbean for each of our 
services? I don't know geronimo, but it would be a great deployment 
alternative if it allow us to undeploy 1 single function (e.g: the 
spoolmanager), alter its configuration and redeploy it without stopping 
the smtp/pop3 servers.


View raw message