[HN Gopher] Calendars, Contacts and Files in Stalwart
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Calendars, Contacts and Files in Stalwart
        
       Author : gpi
       Score  : 122 points
       Date   : 2025-05-27 01:11 UTC (21 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (stalw.art)
 (TXT) w3m dump (stalw.art)
        
       | FlamingMoe wrote:
       | Cool! I love anything in the direction of email decentralization.
        
       | pluto_modadic wrote:
       | glad the focus returns to this instead of ML stuff.
        
       | jazzyjackson wrote:
       | NLnet out here funding another banger
        
       | throw_a_grenade wrote:
       | What is the reason to pick Stalwart over Nextcloud? Nextcloud
       | also has calendars, contacts, files, and integrated mail client.
       | And a reasonably sized ecosystem of apps.
        
         | dwedge wrote:
         | Stalwart is also a mailserver
        
         | mxuribe wrote:
         | While I am happy for areas of competition - since they lead to
         | choice - I also like it when there are
         | partnerships....Nextcloud either acquired or partners with
         | RoundCube, and separately also partners with collabora for the
         | Office suite offering....so might be great if Nextcloud and
         | Stalwart had some sort of partnership for mutual benefit.
        
           | hex-m wrote:
           | The partnership between Nextcloud and Stalwart was announced
           | 4 months ago:
           | https://nextcloud.com/blog/press_releases/nextcloud-
           | stalwart...
        
             | mxuribe wrote:
             | That's awesome, thanks for sharing!
        
       | hatzz wrote:
       | I've always found stalwart interesting but have been a bit
       | sceptical due to the main developer being quite anonymous. It
       | seems that there is a company behind it as well "Stalwart Labs"
       | but I cannot find information about it either, no linkedin and no
       | people. I might just be used to openess as in devs not being
       | anonymous though.
        
         | StalwartLabs wrote:
         | I understand your perspective, many open source communities are
         | built on transparency, and it's natural to want to know the
         | people behind a project.
         | 
         | That said, I personally value privacy highly, which is actually
         | one of the main reasons I started Stalwart Mail Server. I don't
         | maintain a personal presence on LinkedIn or other social media
         | platforms, not because I'm trying to be anonymous, but because
         | I prefer to focus on the work rather than promoting myself.
         | I've found that platforms like LinkedIn are more noise than
         | signal for me, especially with constant recruiter spam.
         | 
         | That being said, Stalwart Labs as a company is far from hidden.
         | You can find our company page on LinkedIn here:
         | https://www.linkedin.com/company/stalwartlabs/. We're also
         | active on:
         | 
         | * Mastodon: https://mastodon.social/@stalwartlabs * Twitter/X:
         | https://x.com/stalwartlabs * Reddit:
         | https://www.reddit.com/r/stalwartlabs/
         | 
         | While I may not be putting my personal life on display, I'm
         | committed to transparency where it matters most: through the
         | project's code, documentation, and community engagement. I hope
         | that helps clarify things!
        
           | hatzz wrote:
           | I feel you as I also value my privacy however i believe there
           | is a difference between anonymity and privacy: a completely
           | unknown entity and a person which personal life is not on the
           | internet. There is a lot of trust involved especially with
           | something as important as an email server which is extremely
           | important for businesses.
           | 
           | It's this and the project being maintained by a solo
           | developer (unless it's a pseudonym for multiple people :D)
           | that makes me not want to personally rely on it.
           | 
           | I'm not only here to complain though, it's an awesome project
           | and I find it really impressive for someone to build a
           | mailserver (and other features) from scratch. Thank you for
           | investing time in open source implementations of protocols
           | that run the world.
           | 
           | Follow up questions: What are the thoughts about enterprise
           | and business support? I see that it exists but I believe
           | there is a lot of trust involved ^^. Will there be more
           | developers, open source, knowing the people behind the
           | project and or support people? Do you have any customers
           | today?
        
             | StalwartLabs wrote:
             | Thanks for follow-up. You're absolutely right that there's
             | a distinction between privacy and anonymity. However I just
             | want to clarify that my decision to keep a low personal
             | profile online stems from a deep belief in privacy, not
             | secrecy.
             | 
             | To give you more context about the project: Stalwart Labs
             | was indeed started and is currently led by a single
             | developer: myself. I have over 30 years of experience
             | working with email technologies and have previously founded
             | three email-related companies.
             | 
             | That said, I'm not working entirely alone. While I'm the
             | core developer and founder, there are others involved in
             | Stalwart Labs today handling support, sales, and
             | maintaining smaller parts of the codebase (mostly changes
             | required by clients). My plan is to continue leading
             | development myself until the project reaches version 1.0,
             | which I hope will happen later this year. After that
             | milestone, the goal is to gradually expand the development
             | team, particularly to support work on a Rust-based webmail
             | and calendar interface that will complement the mail
             | server.
             | 
             | Stalwart's development has been largely self-funded, aside
             | from two NLNet grants. I've been growing the team
             | organically and intentionally. While I have been approached
             | by two VC firms, I've chosen to decline their offers. Not
             | just to avoid external pressure (and stress), but also
             | because some proposed directions conflicted with promises
             | I've made to the community. For example, there have been
             | suggestions to move some open-source features behind a
             | paywall, which I'm against and promised the community never
             | to do.
             | 
             | As for enterprise support, yes, Stalwart Labs offers an
             | enterprise license that includes premium support services.
             | And regarding adoption, I'm happy to say that there are
             | currently a few hundred enterprise clients using Stalwart
             | in production. While I would need the clients' permissions
             | to share their names, I can say that Mozilla Thunderbird is
             | one of them. They've publicly announced their upcoming
             | launch of thundermail.com, which is powered by Stalwart.
             | 
             | I hope that gives you more clarity and confidence in the
             | project. Thanks.
        
               | hatzz wrote:
               | It most definitely gives me clarity and confidence in the
               | project! I'm very happy to hear rejections from VC
               | funding. A few hundred enterprise clients is not a small
               | amount at all for a bootstrapped project.
               | 
               | Unsolicited advice from an anonymous entity online ;):
               | Put this information on the website! It hopefully removes
               | any trust issues that people might have (I believe I'm
               | not the only one), it did for me!
               | 
               | I wish you all the best on your endeavors, I'm excited to
               | see what you bring in the future <3
        
         | gertop wrote:
         | For better or worse there's an immense amount of anonymous
         | developers behind major projects that you likely rely on a
         | daily basis. I wish more core projects had a policy of no
         | anonymous people in the core team at least, but it is what it
         | is...
        
       | matja wrote:
       | This is interesting because Stalwart has a built-in clustering
       | feature and can use distributed databases as its storage layer,
       | so you get high-availability options out of the box. I've
       | struggled with doing similar HA on Dovecot, never quite being
       | true HA (for the open source version of Dovecot) for a while and
       | never found a good other open source option.
        
       | mjl- wrote:
       | Congrats on the release! Having calendaring (and address book)
       | along with your email makes it easy to run your own self-hosted
       | PIM infrastructure.
        
         | StalwartLabs wrote:
         | Thanks! :-)
        
       | lb_ wrote:
       | I really like where Stalwart is going, but I am quite hesitant to
       | use it when basically all commits are authored by a single
       | person. What would happen if he abandons the project or
       | disappears?
        
         | miroljub wrote:
         | Why not? If it goes away, it would take years until it rots and
         | becomes unusable. And given that it uses open standard, it
         | would be pretty simple to take a backup (which you should be
         | doing regularly anyways) and move somewhere else.
        
       | rossy wrote:
       | I checked my repo to see which Stalwart version I was running and
       | if I could update, and I was surprised to find that the Arch
       | package has been deleted due to FOSS licensing concerns[1], the
       | most severe of which seems to be that Stalwart can no longer
       | build without proprietary code[2]. Other smaller issues include
       | the fact that the web admin interface isn't included in the
       | source distribution, but is downloaded from GitHub on first run,
       | and _also_ seems to contain proprietary code[3].
       | 
       | These issues, which would be showstoppers for a real free
       | software project, and pretty easy to fix if you were the
       | rightsholder of the code, were promised to be fixed "in a few
       | weeks" in September last year, and "in a few months" in January
       | this year, however they're still not fixed, which means I can't
       | upgrade - not that I probably want to anymore. I truly believe in
       | free software, so I find the idea of using "open source" as an
       | empty marketing bullet-point for at least eight months to be
       | fairly distasteful. Might be time to switch to Maddy.
       | 
       | [1]:
       | https://gitlab.archlinux.org/archlinux/packaging/packages/st...
       | [2]: https://github.com/stalwartlabs/stalwart/issues/783 [3]:
       | https://gitlab.archlinux.org/archlinux/packaging/packages/st...
        
         | StalwartLabs wrote:
         | I want to clarify that Stalwart can absolutely be compiled
         | without any proprietary code. All you need to do is omit the
         | Enterprise feature flag during compilation [0], and what you
         | get is a 100% AGPL-3.0 build. The Arch package removal wasn't
         | because the software suddenly became non-free, but rather due
         | to a packaging requirement: Arch needs a clean separation of
         | the Enterprise code from the source tree, and that's something
         | we haven't done yet (it will be implemented as a script). The
         | delay isn't due to any unwillingness to comply, it's simply
         | been a matter of prioritization. Over the past few months, the
         | focus was on delivering major features like WebDAV support.
         | That said, I'm still fully committed to resolving the packaging
         | issue because we want Stalwart back in Arch as much as you do.
         | 
         | It's also worth noting that only about 5% of the codebase is
         | Enterprise, and that small slice helps fund ongoing development
         | and expansion of the team [1]. As much as I'd love to be
         | completely sponsor-funded, the reality is that open source
         | projects still need to cover real-world costs. For what it's
         | worth, Stalwart has received two NLNet grants [2] [3] to
         | support open protocol work, which hopefully reinforces our
         | commitment to open source.
         | 
         | So while the optics of this situation may look rough from the
         | outside, I promise it's not some "open source in name only"
         | kind of thing. It's just one of those painful balance acts
         | between building features, maintaining packages, and paying the
         | bills.
         | 
         | And hey, if you're heading back to Maddy, no hard feelings. But
         | the door's always open if you want to give Stalwart another
         | shot down the road.
         | 
         | [0]: https://stalw.art/docs/development/compile [1]:
         | https://stalw.art/compare/#faq [2]:
         | https://nlnet.nl/project/Stalwart/ [3]:
         | https://nlnet.nl/project/Stalwart-Collaboration/
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-05-27 23:02 UTC)