2
Update on SM16 API (and future direction)?
Question asked by James Ratliff - 2/22/2018 at 11:54 AM
Answered
I was wondering if it would be possible to get an update on the status of the SM16 APIs. Basic things (like user admin) don't appear in the help files yet.
 
This is a new build and (as per the help files recommendation) we don't want to build out a provisioning service using legacy APIs that will be outdated before we even finish.
 
You guys are already talking about SM17 and the new APIs for SM16 are still extremely sparse.
 
Are the new SM16 APIs going to be revealed soon? Are the SM16 APIs going to be compatible with SM17?
 
Inquiring minds want to know ;)

1 Reply

Reply to Thread
0
Derek Curtis Replied
Employee Post Marked As Answer
Hey, James
 
So yes, we're working on SmarterMail 17 at the moment with a focus on the new features we're going to roll out like MAPI and our own video/web conferencing solution. Both of these require quite a bit of attention, but they'll certainly be worth the effort. 
 
Therefore, we've had to sacrifice a bit of development and documentation time on the new APIs. That said, this is really a good thing for a couple of reasons:
 
1. Of course, we need to make sure we have everything fully and completely documented and presentable to the public, and
2. They're still somewhat in flux, especially with the new things that are coming out. 
 
While we've gone through some and released them, we still need to go through what's left with a very fine-toothed comb as there could be changes, which would impact users who have them running in a production environment. We don't want the APIs to be a "moving target", which would force users to rewrite code every time something changes in our API and documentation. 
 
More will "become available" -- i.e., documented and publicly available -- with the release of SmarterMail 17, and then more will come post-release. For the time being, using the older APIs is the best way to go. 
Derek Curtis COO SmarterTools Inc. (877) 357-6278 www.smartertools.com

Reply to Thread