incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
Subject Re: Adding a new Project on Jakarta
Date Mon, 17 Oct 2005 18:37:50 GMT
>On 10/17/05, Trustin Lee <> wrote:
>> Hi Joao
>> 2005/10/14, <>:
>> >
>> > >Sounds very interesting and it is similar to what was in our MINA
>> > roadmap.
>> > >MINA project team will provide protocol handlers for well-known
>> protocols
>> > >such FTP, HTTP, and SMTP on top of MINA. I guess your team has
>> > implemented
>> > >it without any network framework. It could be much better if we
>> > cooperate.
>> > >And perhaps we could cooperate with 'ftpserver' team who is already 
>> > >incubation.
>> >
>> > I love the idea, how can we organize this? Yes (kkkk) we had 
>> > the standart FTP commands :-P(PI and DTP) defined in the rfc959, just 
>> > nightmare to understand and use. Maybe we can join forces, why not.
>> OK, it sounds like you're interested enough. Then what about 
>> your team's work by providing us some patches? It will help us to
>> considering letting you and your team in to us. WDYT, Noel? Would there 
>> any issue with doing this?

>IMO patches from outside developers really need to original contributions 
>a manageable size. contributing an existing codebase through patches 
>it hard to trace the origins of the code and may lead to legal doubts 
>the code. if ftpserver is interested in the code, then this needs to be
>imported corrected by obtaining the C/CLAs and so on.

>however, without a community to support and develop the code, large code
>contributions are just dead burdens. with a healthy community, it's easy 
>rewrite bad code whereas even if a project has good code, a unhealthy
>community will drag it down. a healthy community can usually add original
>code quicker that it can assimilate code without a community. so, it's
>usually best to try to import the community with the code.

>João's project is already at sourceforce so the ftpserver folks can 
>take a look at what's already there. after a little discussion, it's 
>pretty easy to work out whether the communities are congurent enough to
>successfully merge so my recommendation would be for João and the rest of
>the developers to hop over to the ftpserver lists and continue the
>discussion there. if things look positive, then the ftpserver project 
>let us know and then the required documents for the code and for the
>communities could be done together.

>- robert

Hello Robert,

        i agree with you, our intentions are to add something, to give 
some values for the common static/stateless FTP Servers that already 
exists in the market. I, my self, and my friends have NO intentions on 
corrupting (or drag it down) good things that may already exists. Even 
because, we wouldn´t start this if that was the reason (just to much 
trouble and no gain). As i said, we are only hoping to aggregate something 
that we understand as a need and as a value to the open source community, 
just that.


  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message