src/site/xdoc/design_objectives.xml - james-project - Git at Google

 <?xml version="1.0"?>
 <!--
   Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) under one
   or more contributor license agreements.  See the NOTICE file
   distributed with this work for additional information
   regarding copyright ownership.  The ASF licenses this file
   to you under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the
   "License"); you may not use this file except in compliance
   with the License.  You may obtain a copy of the License at

     http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0

   Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing,
   software distributed under the License is distributed on an
   "AS IS" BASIS, WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY
   KIND, either express or implied.  See the License for the
   specific language governing permissions and limitations
   under the License.
 -->
 <document>
   <properties>
     <title>Design Objectives</title>
     <author email="site-dev@james.apache.org">James Project Web Team</author>
   </properties>
   <body>

     <section name="Design Objectives">

       <subsection name="Features">
         <p>These are some of the currently implemented features:</p>
         <p>
           <i>
             <b>Complete portability</b>
           </i>  Apache James is be a 100% pure Java application
        based on the Java 2 platform and the JavaMail 1.3 API.
   </p>
         <p>
           <i>
             <b>Protocol abstraction</b>
           </i>  Unlike other mail engines, protocols are seen only
        like "communication languages" ruling comunications between clients and
        the server. Apache James is not be tied to any particular protocol but
        follow an abstracted server design (like JavaMail did on the
        client side)</p>
         <p>
           <i>
             <b>Complete solution</b>
           </i>  the mail system is able to handle both mail
        transport and storage in a single server application. Apache James
        works alone without the need for any other server or solution.</p>
         <p>
           <i>
             <b>Mailet support</b>
           </i>  Apache James supports the Apache Mailet API. A Mailet
        is a discrete piece of mail-processing logic which is incorporated into
        a Mailet-compliant mail-server's processing. This easy-to-write,
        easy-to-use pattern allows developers to build powerful customized mail
        systems. Examples of the services a Mailet might provide include: a
        mail-to-fax or mail-to-phone transformer, a filter, a language translator, a mailing
        list manager, etc. Several Mailets are included in the James
        distribution (see <a href="3/index.html">server documentation</a>).</p>
         <p>
           <i>
             <b>Resource abstraction</b>
           </i>  Like protocols, resources are abstracted and,
        accessed through defined interfaces (JavaMail for transport, JDBC for
        spool storage or user accounts in RDBMS's, Apache Mailet API). The server is
        highly modular and reuse solutions from other projects.</p>
         <p>
           <i>
             <b>Secure and multi-threaded design</b>
           </i>  Based on the technology developed
        for the Apache JServ servlet engine, Apache James has a careful,
        security-oriented, full multi-threaded design, to allow performance,
        scalability and mission-critical use.</p>
         <p>Anything else you may want if you help us write it :-)</p>
       </subsection>
       <subsection name="Standards compliance">
         <p>It is the existence of published "open" standards which
 allows independant teams to develop interoperable software.
 <br/>James attempts to support a number of these standards most of which are
 IETF RFC's and in the areas covered by these standards the published standard
 is our requirements document.
 <br/>This sometimes leads to confusion where behaviour is not
 the subject of a relevant standard, or conflict where common
 (de-facto) behaviour is actually at odds with a supported standard.
 <br/>We believe that it is our responsibility to adhere to the published standard.
 If we allow our implementation to deviate it means that we are tacitly encouraging
 the situation whereby interoperability is no longer guarenteed by standards
 compliance alone, but also requires access to undocumented and possibly
 even commercially licenced technology. There is no easy route for a
 newcomer to aquire these secrets, and interoperabilty
 becomes something only available to the elite.
         </p>
         <p>The James policy for issues of non-compliance tries to tread the fine line
 between a pragmatic acceptance of other people's misinterpretation of the
 RFC's and an evangelical defence of open standards as the key to freedom of interoperation.
         </p>
         <p>
 In practice this policy is that certain well argued of cases of
 non-compliance which can be *safely* worked around, will be tolerated by
 James.
 </p>
         <p>
 In cases (like jira issue JAMES-344 ) where variance from a published standard is
 required it is desirable that this functionality is disabled in James by default,
 it must be prominently and clearly documented that this causes James
 to violate the relevant standard, and should be enabled by explicit
 configuration, making its use a conscious decision of the user rather
 than an decision taken by the James team.
 </p>
         <p>
 In cases where the required behaviour is not within the scope of any standard which
 James claims to support (such as behaviour which is a de-facto standard or
 an <i>internet draft</i> RFC but not yet subject of a <i>standards track</i> RFC) it is
 acceptable to implement the behaviour so long as it is adequately
 documented (for instance by refrence to an <i>internet draft</i> or
 other public document) and users can be clear about what to expect from James.
 </p>
       </subsection>
     </section>
   </body>
 </document>
	<?xml version="1.0"?>
	<!--
	Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) under one
	or more contributor license agreements. See the NOTICE file
	distributed with this work for additional information
	regarding copyright ownership. The ASF licenses this file
	to you under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the
	"License"); you may not use this file except in compliance
	with the License. You may obtain a copy of the License at

	http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0

	Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing,
	software distributed under the License is distributed on an
	"AS IS" BASIS, WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY
	KIND, either express or implied. See the License for the
	specific language governing permissions and limitations
	under the License.
	-->
	<document>
	<properties>
	<title>Design Objectives</title>
	<author email="site-dev@james.apache.org">James Project Web Team</author>
	</properties>
	<body>

	<section name="Design Objectives">

	<subsection name="Features">
	<p>These are some of the currently implemented features:</p>
	<p>
	<i>
	<b>Complete portability</b>
	</i> Apache James is be a 100% pure Java application
	based on the Java 2 platform and the JavaMail 1.3 API.
	</p>
	<p>
	<i>
	<b>Protocol abstraction</b>
	</i> Unlike other mail engines, protocols are seen only
	like "communication languages" ruling comunications between clients and
	the server. Apache James is not be tied to any particular protocol but
	follow an abstracted server design (like JavaMail did on the
	client side)</p>
	<p>
	<i>
	<b>Complete solution</b>
	</i> the mail system is able to handle both mail
	transport and storage in a single server application. Apache James
	works alone without the need for any other server or solution.</p>
	<p>
	<i>
	<b>Mailet support</b>
	</i> Apache James supports the Apache Mailet API. A Mailet
	is a discrete piece of mail-processing logic which is incorporated into
	a Mailet-compliant mail-server's processing. This easy-to-write,
	easy-to-use pattern allows developers to build powerful customized mail
	systems. Examples of the services a Mailet might provide include: a
	mail-to-fax or mail-to-phone transformer, a filter, a language translator, a mailing
	list manager, etc. Several Mailets are included in the James
	distribution (see <a href="3/index.html">server documentation</a>).</p>
	<p>
	<i>
	<b>Resource abstraction</b>
	</i> Like protocols, resources are abstracted and,
	accessed through defined interfaces (JavaMail for transport, JDBC for
	spool storage or user accounts in RDBMS's, Apache Mailet API). The server is
	highly modular and reuse solutions from other projects.</p>
	<p>
	<i>
	<b>Secure and multi-threaded design</b>
	</i> Based on the technology developed
	for the Apache JServ servlet engine, Apache James has a careful,
	security-oriented, full multi-threaded design, to allow performance,
	scalability and mission-critical use.</p>
	<p>Anything else you may want if you help us write it :-)</p>
	</subsection>
	<subsection name="Standards compliance">
	<p>It is the existence of published "open" standards which
	allows independant teams to develop interoperable software.
	<br/>James attempts to support a number of these standards most of which are
	IETF RFC's and in the areas covered by these standards the published standard
	is our requirements document.
	<br/>This sometimes leads to confusion where behaviour is not
	the subject of a relevant standard, or conflict where common
	(de-facto) behaviour is actually at odds with a supported standard.
	<br/>We believe that it is our responsibility to adhere to the published standard.
	If we allow our implementation to deviate it means that we are tacitly encouraging
	the situation whereby interoperability is no longer guarenteed by standards
	compliance alone, but also requires access to undocumented and possibly
	even commercially licenced technology. There is no easy route for a
	newcomer to aquire these secrets, and interoperabilty
	becomes something only available to the elite.
	</p>
	<p>The James policy for issues of non-compliance tries to tread the fine line
	between a pragmatic acceptance of other people's misinterpretation of the
	RFC's and an evangelical defence of open standards as the key to freedom of interoperation.
	</p>
	<p>
	In practice this policy is that certain well argued of cases of
	non-compliance which can be safely worked around, will be tolerated by
	James.
	</p>
	<p>
	In cases (like jira issue JAMES-344 ) where variance from a published standard is
	required it is desirable that this functionality is disabled in James by default,
	it must be prominently and clearly documented that this causes James
	to violate the relevant standard, and should be enabled by explicit
	configuration, making its use a conscious decision of the user rather
	than an decision taken by the James team.
	</p>
	<p>
	In cases where the required behaviour is not within the scope of any standard which
	James claims to support (such as behaviour which is a de-facto standard or
	an <i>internet draft</i> RFC but not yet subject of a <i>standards track</i> RFC) it is
	acceptable to implement the behaviour so long as it is adequately
	documented (for instance by refrence to an <i>internet draft</i> or
	other public document) and users can be clear about what to expect from James.
	</p>
	</subsection>
	</section>
	</body>
	</document>