> Since I am pretty much stuck with the documentation efforts (as I have > mentioned I need more input from the community if I am to move forward), what > I think I’ll try to do next is write an “independent” API for SMTP. […]
I spent a few hours on this today, but already I think I am going to give up. 😬 RFC5321 is (1) quite complex, especially because it has a lot of options and references other specs, and (2) really poorly written IMO, which makes interpreting it much more difficult than something I am willing to invest my energies into. I’ll try poking around in other places in the hope that members will reply to my various outstanding questions. In the meantime, my respect for James has grown. Although there are issues with readability and componentization, the fact that it can implement this kind of specification at all is really quite a feat. Personally, I think that we should aspire higher. James should provide a kind of “reference” API for SMTP/IMAP etc in Java. As far as I can tell, James is the de facto Java API. The quality of the APIs ought to match this role. But then again, now that I’ve tried to make sense of the spec in the form of code and quickly gave up, maybe it’s just a pipe dream and the current API is the best that’s ever gonna happen. Cheers, =David
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
