Re: Thunderbird, the future, mozilla-central and comm-central

2015-12-01 Thread mokvwap
On Monday, November 30, 2015 at 10:08:19 PM UTC+1, Mitchell Baker wrote:
> This is a long-ish message. It covers general topics about Thunderbird 
> and the future, and also the topics of the Foundation involvement (point 
> 9) and the question of merging repositories (point 11).   Naturally, I 
> believe it's worth the time to read through the end.
> 
> 1. Firefox and Thunderbird have lived with competing demands for some 
> time now. Today Thunderbird developers spend much of their time 
> responding to changes made in core Mozilla systems and technologies. At 
> the same time, build, Firefox, and platform engineers continue to pay a 
> tax to support Thunderbird.
> 
> 2. These competing demands are not good for either project. Engineers 
> working on Thunderbird must focus on keeping up and adapting Firefox's 
> web-driven changes. Engineers working on Firefox and related projects 
> end up considering the competing demands of Thunderbird, and/or 
> wondering if and how much they should assist Thunderbird. Neither 
> project can focus wholeheartedly on what is best for it.
> 
> 3. These competing demands will not get better soon. Instead, they are 
> very likely to get worse. Firefox and related projects are now speeding 
> up the rate of change, modernizing our development process and our 
> infrastructure. Indeed, this is required for Mozilla to have significant 
> impact in the current computing environment.
> 
> 4. There is a belief among some that living with these competing demands 
> is good for the Mozilla project as a whole, because it gives us an 
> additional focus, assists Thunderbird as a dedicated open source 
> community, and also supports an open source standards based email 
> client. This sentiment is appealing, and I share it to some extent. 
> There is also a sense that caring for fellow open source developers is 
> good, which I also share.  However, point 2 above -- "Neither project can 
> focus wholeheartedly on what is best for it" -- is the most important 
> point. Having Thunderbird has an additional product and focus is *not* 
> good overall if it causes all of our products -- Firefox, other 
> web-driven products and Thunderbird -- to fall short of what we can 
> accomplish.
> 
> 5.  Many inside of Mozilla, including an overwhelming majority of our 
> leadership, feel the need to be laser-focused on activities like Firefox 
> that can have an industry-wide impact.With all due respect to 
> Thunderbird and the Thunderbird community, we have been clear for years 
> that we do not view Thunderbird as having this sort of potential.
> 
> 6.  Given this, it's clear to me that sooner or later paying a tax to 
> support Thunderbird will not make sense as a policy for Mozilla.I 
> know many believe this time came a while back, and I've been slow to say 
> this clearly.  And of course, some feel that this time should never 
> come.  However, as I say, it's clear to me today that continuing to live 
> with these competing demands given our focus on industry impact is 
> increasingly unstable.  We've seen this already, in an unstructured way, 
> as various groups inside Mozilla stop supporting Thunderbird.  The 
> accelerating speed of Firefox and infrastructure changes -- which I 
> welcome wholeheartedly -- will emphasize this.
> 
> 7.  Some Mozillians are eager to see Mozilla support community-managed 
> projects within our main development efforts.  I am also sympathetic to 
> this view, with a key precondition.  Community-managed projects that 
> make the main effort less nimble and likely to succeed don't fit very 
> well into this category for me.  They can still be great open source 
> projects -- this is a separate question from whether the fit in our main 
> development systems.  I feel so strongly about this because I am so 
> concerned that "the Web" we  love is at risk.  If we want the traits of 
> the Web to live and prosper in the world of mobile, social and data then 
> we have to be laser-focused on this.
> 
> 8.  Therefore I believe Thunderbird should would thrive best by 
> separating itself from reliance on Mozilla development systems and in 
> some cases, Mozilla technology. The current setting isn't stable, and we 
> should start actively looking into how we can transition in an orderly 
> way to a future where Thunderbird and Firefox are un-coupled.   I don't 
> know what this will look like, or how it will work yet. I do know that 
> it needs to happen, for both Firefox and Thunderbird's sake.  This is a 
> big job, and may require expertise that the Thunderbird team doesn't yet 
> have.Mozilla can provide various forms of assistance to the 
> Thunderbird team via a set of the Mozilla Foundation's capabilities.
> 
> 9. Mark Surman of the Mozilla Foundation and I are both interested in 
> helping find a way for Thunderbird to separate from Mozilla 
> infrastructure. We also want to make sure that Thunderbird has the right 
> kind of legal and financial 

Re: Thunderbird, the future, mozilla-central and comm-central

2015-12-01 Thread Kurt Roeckx

On 2015-11-30 22:11, Mitchell Baker wrote:

5.  Many inside of Mozilla, including an overwhelming majority of our
leadership, feel the need to be laser-focused on activities like Firefox
that can have an industry-wide impact.With all due respect to
Thunderbird and the Thunderbird community, we have been clear for years
that we do not view Thunderbird as having this sort of potential.


I currently don't see Mozilla having a focus or having an industry-wide 
impact.  I do see both Firefox and Thunderbird as having that potential.



Kurt

___
dev-platform mailing list
dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform


Thunderbird, the future, mozilla-central and comm-central

2015-11-30 Thread Mitchell Baker
This is a long-ish message. It covers general topics about Thunderbird 
and the future, and also the topics of the Foundation involvement (point 
9) and the question of merging repositories (point 11).   Naturally, I 
believe it’s worth the time to read through the end.


1. Firefox and Thunderbird have lived with competing demands for some 
time now. Today Thunderbird developers spend much of their time 
responding to changes made in core Mozilla systems and technologies. At 
the same time, build, Firefox, and platform engineers continue to pay a 
tax to support Thunderbird.


2. These competing demands are not good for either project. Engineers 
working on Thunderbird must focus on keeping up and adapting Firefox’s 
web-driven changes. Engineers working on Firefox and related projects 
end up considering the competing demands of Thunderbird, and/or 
wondering if and how much they should assist Thunderbird. Neither 
project can focus wholeheartedly on what is best for it.


3. These competing demands will not get better soon. Instead, they are 
very likely to get worse. Firefox and related projects are now speeding 
up the rate of change, modernizing our development process and our 
infrastructure. Indeed, this is required for Mozilla to have significant 
impact in the current computing environment.


4. There is a belief among some that living with these competing demands 
is good for the Mozilla project as a whole, because it gives us an 
additional focus, assists Thunderbird as a dedicated open source 
community, and also supports an open source standards based email 
client. This sentiment is appealing, and I share it to some extent. 
There is also a sense that caring for fellow open source developers is 
good, which I also share.  However, point 2 above — “Neither project can 
focus wholeheartedly on what is best for it” -- is the most important 
point. Having Thunderbird has an additional product and focus is *not* 
good overall if it causes all of our products — Firefox, other 
web-driven products and Thunderbird — to fall short of what we can 
accomplish.


5.  Many inside of Mozilla, including an overwhelming majority of our 
leadership, feel the need to be laser-focused on activities like Firefox 
that can have an industry-wide impact.With all due respect to 
Thunderbird and the Thunderbird community, we have been clear for years 
that we do not view Thunderbird as having this sort of potential.


6.  Given this, it’s clear to me that sooner or later paying a tax to 
support Thunderbird will not make sense as a policy for Mozilla.I 
know many believe this time came a while back, and I’ve been slow to say 
this clearly.  And of course, some feel that this time should never 
come.  However, as I say, it’s clear to me today that continuing to live 
with these competing demands given our focus on industry impact is 
increasingly unstable.  We’ve seen this already, in an unstructured way, 
as various groups inside Mozilla stop supporting Thunderbird.  The 
accelerating speed of Firefox and infrastructure changes -- which I 
welcome wholeheartedly -- will emphasize this.


7.  Some Mozillians are eager to see Mozilla support community-managed 
projects within our main development efforts.  I am also sympathetic to 
this view, with a key precondition.  Community-managed projects that 
make the main effort less nimble and likely to succeed don’t fit very 
well into this category for me.  They can still be great open source 
projects -- this is a separate question from whether the fit in our main 
development systems.  I feel so strongly about this because I am so 
concerned that “the Web” we  love is at risk.  If we want the traits of 
the Web to live and prosper in the world of mobile, social and data then 
we have to be laser-focused on this.


8.  Therefore I believe Thunderbird should would thrive best by 
separating itself from reliance on Mozilla development systems and in 
some cases, Mozilla technology. The current setting isn’t stable, and we 
should start actively looking into how we can transition in an orderly 
way to a future where Thunderbird and Firefox are un-coupled.   I don’t 
know what this will look like, or how it will work yet. I do know that 
it needs to happen, for both Firefox and Thunderbird’s sake.  This is a 
big job, and may require expertise that the Thunderbird team doesn’t yet 
have.Mozilla can provide various forms of assistance to the 
Thunderbird team via a set of the Mozilla Foundation’s capabilities.


9. Mark Surman of the Mozilla Foundation and I are both interested in 
helping find a way for Thunderbird to separate from Mozilla 
infrastructure. We also want to make sure that Thunderbird has the right 
kind of legal and financial home, one that will help the community 
thrive. Mark has been talking with the Thunderbird leadership about 
this, and has offered some of his time and focus and resources to 
assist. He will detail that offer in a separate 

Re: Thunderbird, the future, mozilla-central and comm-central

2015-11-30 Thread Mark Surman


Hi all

As a follow on to Mitchell’s post, I want to outline more specifically 
how the Foundation got involved and the ways in which I believe the 
Foundation can assist in this situation.


Mitchell and I have had a number of discussions regarding Thunderbird. 
The Thunderbird Council has also come to each of us at various times. We 
agree it could be helpful for some of the Foundation's capabilities to 
be part of this work. Specifically, I’ve put forward an offer of 
Foundation staff time and resources to:


1. Advise and support the Council as they come up with a plan. Mitchell, 
myself and many at the Foundation care about the long term health of 
Thunderbird and feel some responsibility to help get it to a good spot.


2. Beyond time, we’ve offered the Council a modest amount of money to 
pay for contractors who can help develop options for both the 
organizational and technical future of Thunderbird.


2.1 As Mitchell said, this *does not* mean that MoFo is making technical 
decisions about Thunderbird -- just that we want to make sure the 
Council has access a technical architect, a business planner, etc. to 
generate plans and options that the community can consider together.


2.2 As part of this, we’ve also (loosely) offered MoFo's meeting 
facilitation team run by Allen Gunn to bring together a set of 
Thunderbird stakeholders to discuss these options. I haven't fully 
discussed this part with the Council yet.


3. Finally, we've offered to accept donations for Thunderbird and 
disperse funds for contractors while we're figuring out this plan.


3.1 This makes MoFo, who already owns the Thunderbird IP, into a 'fiscal 
home' for the Thunderbird community during this period. We also play 
this role for Firebug.


3.2 We’re talking to at least one org who is considering supporting 
Thunderbird. We are also looking at adding a user donation function to 
support the Thunderbird community. We will likely also supplement this 
funding with some of our own resources in a small way.


Some of the items above could be done via MoCo (items 2, 2.2) or MoFo, 
and since I have a bit of energy to focus on this now, Mitchell and I 
agreed we should take advantage of this energy. Other items make much 
more sense to be handled from the Foundation (item 3).


I'm not sure where all this leads -- but I am certain that we need to 
invest some time and resources in figuring out a good future for 
Thunderbird. That's what I've offered to help with.


If people have questions or want to somehow help out themselves, I'd be 
happy to discuss.


ms

On 2015-11-30 4:11 PM, Mitchell Baker wrote:
This is a long-ish message. It covers general topics about Thunderbird 
and the future, and also the topics of the Foundation involvement 
(point 9) and the question of merging repositories (point 11).   
Naturally, I believe it’s worth the time to read through the end.


1. Firefox and Thunderbird have lived with competing demands for some 
time now. Today Thunderbird developers spend much of their time 
responding to changes made in core Mozilla systems and technologies. 
At the same time, build, Firefox, and platform engineers continue to 
pay a tax to support Thunderbird.


2. These competing demands are not good for either project. Engineers 
working on Thunderbird must focus on keeping up and adapting Firefox’s 
web-driven changes. Engineers working on Firefox and related projects 
end up considering the competing demands of Thunderbird, and/or 
wondering if and how much they should assist Thunderbird. Neither 
project can focus wholeheartedly on what is best for it.


3. These competing demands will not get better soon. Instead, they are 
very likely to get worse. Firefox and related projects are now 
speeding up the rate of change, modernizing our development process 
and our infrastructure. Indeed, this is required for Mozilla to have 
significant impact in the current computing environment.


4. There is a belief among some that living with these competing 
demands is good for the Mozilla project as a whole, because it gives 
us an additional focus, assists Thunderbird as a dedicated open source 
community, and also supports an open source standards based email 
client. This sentiment is appealing, and I share it to some extent. 
There is also a sense that caring for fellow open source developers is 
good, which I also share.  However, point 2 above — “Neither project 
can focus wholeheartedly on what is best for it” -- is the most 
important point. Having Thunderbird has an additional product and 
focus is *not* good overall if it causes all of our products — 
Firefox, other web-driven products and Thunderbird — to fall short of 
what we can accomplish.


5.  Many inside of Mozilla, including an overwhelming majority of our 
leadership, feel the need to be laser-focused on activities like 
Firefox that can have an industry-wide impact.With all due respect 
to Thunderbird and the Thunderbird community, we have 

Re: Thunderbird, the future, mozilla-central and comm-central

2015-11-30 Thread Mark Surman


Hi all

As a follow on to Mitchell’s post, I want to outline more specifically 
how the Foundation got involved and the ways in which I believe the 
Foundation can assist in this situation.


Mitchell and I have had a number of discussions regarding Thunderbird. 
The Thunderbird Council has also come to each of us at various times. We 
agree it could be helpful for some of the Foundation's capabilities to 
be part of this work. Specifically, I’ve put forward an offer of 
Foundation staff time and resources to:


1. Advise and support the Council as they come up with a plan. Mitchell, 
myself and many at the Foundation care about the long term health of 
Thunderbird and feel some responsibility to help get it to a good spot.


2. Beyond time, we’ve offered the Council a modest amount of money to 
pay for contractors who can help develop options for both the 
organizational and technical future of Thunderbird.


2.1 As Mitchell said, this *does not* mean that MoFo is making technical 
decisions about Thunderbird -- just that we want to make sure the 
Council has access a technical architect, a business planner, etc. to 
generate plans and options that the community can consider together.


2.2 As part of this, we’ve also (loosely) offered MoFo's meeting 
facilitation team run by Allen Gunn to bring together a set of 
Thunderbird stakeholders to discuss these options. I haven't fully 
discussed this part with the Council yet.


3. Finally, we've offered to accept donations for Thunderbird and 
disperse funds for contractors while we're figuring out this plan.


3.1 This makes MoFo, who already owns the Thunderbird IP, into a 'fiscal 
home' for the Thunderbird community during this period. We also play 
this role for Firebug.


3.2 We’re talking to at least one org who is considering supporting 
Thunderbird. We are also looking at adding a user donation function to 
support the Thunderbird community. We will likely also supplement this 
funding with some of our own resources in a small way.


Some of the items above could be done via MoCo (items 2, 2.2) or MoFo, 
and since I have a bit of energy to focus on this now, Mitchell and I 
agreed we should take advantage of this energy. Other items make much 
more sense to be handled from the Foundation (item 3).


I'm not sure where all this leads -- but I am certain that we need to 
invest some time and resources in figuring out a good future for 
Thunderbird. That's what I've offered to help with.


If people have questions or want to somehow help out themselves, I'd be 
happy to discuss.


ms

On 2015-11-30 4:11 PM, Mitchell Baker wrote:
This is a long-ish message. It covers general topics about Thunderbird 
and the future, and also the topics of the Foundation involvement 
(point 9) and the question of merging repositories (point 11).   
Naturally, I believe it’s worth the time to read through the end.


1. Firefox and Thunderbird have lived with competing demands for some 
time now. Today Thunderbird developers spend much of their time 
responding to changes made in core Mozilla systems and technologies. 
At the same time, build, Firefox, and platform engineers continue to 
pay a tax to support Thunderbird.


2. These competing demands are not good for either project. Engineers 
working on Thunderbird must focus on keeping up and adapting Firefox’s 
web-driven changes. Engineers working on Firefox and related projects 
end up considering the competing demands of Thunderbird, and/or 
wondering if and how much they should assist Thunderbird. Neither 
project can focus wholeheartedly on what is best for it.


3. These competing demands will not get better soon. Instead, they are 
very likely to get worse. Firefox and related projects are now 
speeding up the rate of change, modernizing our development process 
and our infrastructure. Indeed, this is required for Mozilla to have 
significant impact in the current computing environment.


4. There is a belief among some that living with these competing 
demands is good for the Mozilla project as a whole, because it gives 
us an additional focus, assists Thunderbird as a dedicated open source 
community, and also supports an open source standards based email 
client. This sentiment is appealing, and I share it to some extent. 
There is also a sense that caring for fellow open source developers is 
good, which I also share.  However, point 2 above — “Neither project 
can focus wholeheartedly on what is best for it” -- is the most 
important point. Having Thunderbird has an additional product and 
focus is *not* good overall if it causes all of our products — 
Firefox, other web-driven products and Thunderbird — to fall short of 
what we can accomplish.


5.  Many inside of Mozilla, including an overwhelming majority of our 
leadership, feel the need to be laser-focused on activities like 
Firefox that can have an industry-wide impact.With all due respect 
to Thunderbird and the Thunderbird community, we have