Re: [libreoffice-users] Thunderbird potential as the official/default email-client for LO? Re: [board-discuss] BoD decision from 2015-10-05

Dear all, As this is the LibreOffice user mailing list would you be kind enough to take this discussion elsewhere, for instance the Thunderbird mailing list? Thanks, Charles. -- Envoyé de mon appareil Android avec K-9 Mail. Veuillez excuser ma brièveté. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to:

Re: [libreoffice-users] Thunderbird potential as the official/default email-client for LO? Re: [board-discuss] BoD decision from 2015-10-05

On 3/3/2016 2:44 PM, Felmon Davis wrote: On Thu, 3 Mar 2016, Paul D. Mirowsky wrote: My experience with IMAP through a browser is helping friends install Thunderbird, friends who have had there account taken over in AOL, MS Mail and YaHoo. When I install Thunderbird, I suggest to them that

Re: [libreoffice-users] Thunderbird potential as the official/default email-client for LO? Re: [board-discuss] BoD decision from 2015-10-05

On Thu, 3 Mar 2016, Tanstaafl wrote: On 3/3/2016 10:18 AM, Davis, Felmon wrote: On Mar 3, 2016 7:19 AM, "James Knott" wrote: You should be able to configure your IMAP client to download messages for "offline" mode. There is also an archive

Re: [libreoffice-users] Thunderbird potential as the official/default email-client for LO? Re: [board-discuss] BoD decision from 2015-10-05

On Thu, 3 Mar 2016, Paul D. Mirowsky wrote: My experience with IMAP through a browser is helping friends install Thunderbird, friends who have had there account taken over in AOL, MS Mail and YaHoo. When I install Thunderbird, I suggest to them that it does not require using a browser,

Re: [libreoffice-users] Thunderbird potential as the official/default email-client for LO? Re: [board-discuss] BoD decision from 2015-10-05

PLONK On 3/3/2016 1:12 PM, Paul D. Mirowsky wrote: > Thank you taking the time to repeatedly note the level of my intelligence. > > Regretfully, It has not resulted in any clear and/or concise explanations. > > No why, no when and no how. > > My apologies to others on

Re: [libreoffice-users] Thunderbird potential as the official/default email-client for LO? Re: [board-discuss] BoD decision from 2015-10-05

Thank you taking the time to repeatedly note the level of my intelligence. Regretfully, It has not resulted in any clear and/or concise explanations. No why, no when and no how. My apologies to others on this list. Paul On 3/3/2016 12:38 PM, Tanstaafl wrote: Will never, ever happen, because

Re: [libreoffice-users] Thunderbird potential as the official/default email-client for LO? Re: [board-discuss] BoD decision from 2015-10-05

Will never, ever happen, because it is a STUPID IDEA. Sorry, been trying to not be so rude, but, well, sometimes there is no other way. OF course, I am wrong - there is one way something like that might actually ever be attempted - if you write it yourself. I'd say good luck, but it isn't a

Re: [libreoffice-users] Thunderbird potential as the official/default email-client for LO? Re: [board-discuss] BoD decision from 2015-10-05

Edit 2. Have Thunderbird POP installed on multiple devices that align themselves to e-mail address(es) securely without the interaction of a server except for PGP and message store and forward. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems?

Re: [libreoffice-users] Thunderbird potential as the official/default email-client for LO? Re: [board-discuss] BoD decision from 2015-10-05

On 3/3/2016 12:10 PM, Paul D. Mirowsky wrote: > 1. Make secured e-mails without trusting the the server. Security ends > where trust starts. So, learn how to use encryption (PGP) end to end. That is the only way to ensure secure email. The problem you'll have is

Re: [libreoffice-users] Thunderbird potential as the official/default email-client for LO? Re: [board-discuss] BoD decision from 2015-10-05

My experience with IMAP through a browser is helping friends install Thunderbird, friends who have had there account taken over in AOL, MS Mail and YaHoo. When I install Thunderbird, I suggest to them that it does not require using a browser, greatly reducing the chance of being tripped up on

Re: [libreoffice-users] Thunderbird potential as the official/default email-client for LO? Re: [board-discuss] BoD decision from 2015-10-05

On 3/3/2016 10:18 AM, Davis, Felmon wrote: > On Mar 3, 2016 7:19 AM, "James Knott" wrote: >> You should be able to configure your IMAP client to download messages >> for "offline" mode. There is also an archive function. > yeah, like I said, got to do

Re: [libreoffice-users] Thunderbird potential as the official/default email-client for LO? Re: [board-discuss] BoD decision from 2015-10-05

On Mar 3, 2016 7:19 AM, "James Knott" wrote: > > On 03/03/2016 04:09 AM, Felmon Davis wrote: > > I used to use POP (and it's still set up on a couple of my machines > > albeit not currently in use) but mainly I'm on IMAP. what I liked > > about POP was the ease of making

Re: [libreoffice-users] Thunderbird potential as the official/default email-client for LO? Re: [board-discuss] BoD decision from 2015-10-05

On 03/03/2016 04:09 AM, Felmon Davis wrote: > I used to use POP (and it's still set up on a couple of my machines > albeit not currently in use) but mainly I'm on IMAP. what I liked > about POP was the ease of making local backups of email. it's been a > couple of yrs since I've explored options

Re: [libreoffice-users] Thunderbird potential as the official/default email-client for LO? Re: [board-discuss] BoD decision from 2015-10-05

Paul, for the benefit of us lurkers trying to follow this discussion, could you in a brief statement explain why you think POP should be preferred? (I believe this is your general point? if not, a clear statement is welcome.) I used to use POP (and it's still set up on a couple of my

Re: [libreoffice-users] Thunderbird potential as the official/default email-client for LO? Re: [board-discuss] BoD decision from 2015-10-05

On 03/02/2016 05:57 PM, toki wrote: >> Also, if you're leaving email on a POP server for a period of time, > it's going to be there when someone comes looking for it. > > That is not the threat model I was addressing. Then what was it? -- To unsubscribe e-mail to:

Re: [libreoffice-users] Thunderbird potential as the official/default email-client for LO? Re: [board-discuss] BoD decision from 2015-10-05

On 02/03/2016 22:26, James Knott wrote: >Also, if you're leaving email on a POP server for a period of time, it's going to be there when someone comes looking for it. That is not the threat model I was addressing. jonathon -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org

Re: [libreoffice-users] Thunderbird potential as the official/default email-client for LO? Re: [board-discuss] BoD decision from 2015-10-05

On 03/02/2016 05:08 PM, toki wrote: > If, as is usually done with IMAP, the email is stored on a server that > is neither owned, nor operated, nor controlled by the recipient of the > email, then the security issue is the IMAP vendor turning that email > over to third parties without your

Re: [libreoffice-users] Thunderbird potential as the official/default email-client for LO? Re: [board-discuss] BoD decision from 2015-10-05

On 02/03/2016 21:40, James Knott wrote: > Also, how is IMAP a security problem, If, as is usually done with IMAP, the email is stored on a server that is neither owned, nor operated, nor controlled by the recipient of the email, then the security issue is the IMAP vendor turning that email over

Re: [libreoffice-users] Thunderbird potential as the official/default email-client for LO? Re: [board-discuss] BoD decision from 2015-10-05

On 03/02/2016 03:46 PM, Paul D. Mirowsky wrote: > Thunderbird is a database of information. The fact that there is no > data replication built in is not the inhibiting factor to doing so. It is an email client, nothing more. If you want replication, you're going to need some means for all

Re: [libreoffice-users] Thunderbird potential as the official/default email-client for LO? Re: [board-discuss] BoD decision from 2015-10-05

On 03/02/2016 12:06 PM, Tanstaafl wrote: >> IMAP is a security risk that increases the attack surface area. YaHoo, >> > should I say more. > No, you really shouldn't, because you obviously don't know what you're > talking about. > > The only thing IMAP *might* have in common with Yahoo is that

Re: [libreoffice-users] Thunderbird potential as the official/default email-client for LO? Re: [board-discuss] BoD decision from 2015-10-05

On 03/02/2016 11:32 AM, Paul D. Mirowsky wrote: > IMAP is a pre-existing condition. > > The ability for POP clients to keep all of their shared clients > current is a glaring omission that should be rectified. > I regret not having the ability to do this myself. I guess you don't know much about

Re: [libreoffice-users] Thunderbird potential as the official/default email-client for LO? Re: [board-discuss] BoD decision from 2015-10-05

On 3/2/2016 4:00 PM, Paul D. Mirowsky wrote: > On 3/2/2016 2:17 PM, toki wrote: >> Can you please rephrase that. >> If you literally mean what you wrote, then please study both the POP and >> IMAP protocol specifications, before making any suggestions as to what >> should

Re: [libreoffice-users] Thunderbird potential as the official/default email-client for LO? Re: [board-discuss] BoD decision from 2015-10-05

On 3/2/2016 2:17 PM, toki wrote: On 02/03/2016 16:32, Paul D. Mirowsky wrote: The ability for POP clients to keep all of their shared clients current is a glaring omission that should be rectified. Can you please rephrase that. If you literally mean what you wrote, then please study both

Re: [libreoffice-users] Thunderbird potential as the official/default email-client for LO? Re: [board-discuss] BoD decision from 2015-10-05

What relates Thunderbird is a database of information. The fact that there is no data replication built in is not the inhibiting factor to doing so. I have underlined the pertinent words from a quoted definition from the previously mentioned URL.

Re: [libreoffice-users] Thunderbird potential as the official/default email-client for LO? Re: [board-discuss] BoD decision from 2015-10-05

Neither of which relate to serverless mail synchronization of local mail stores. On 3/2/2016 1:17 PM, Paul D. Mirowsky wrote: > Ok, I don't know what Data Replication is. > Please see > http://searchsqlserver.techtarget.com/definition/database-replication > > I don't

Re: [libreoffice-users] Thunderbird potential as the official/default email-client for LO? Re: [board-discuss] BoD decision from 2015-10-05

On 02/03/2016 16:32, Paul D. Mirowsky wrote: > The ability for POP clients to keep all of their shared clients current is a > glaring omission that should be rectified. Can you please rephrase that. If you literally mean what you wrote, then please study both the POP and IMAP protocol

Re: [libreoffice-users] Thunderbird potential as the official/default email-client for LO? Re: [board-discuss] BoD decision from 2015-10-05

Ok, I don't know what Data Replication is. Please see http://searchsqlserver.techtarget.com/definition/database-replication I don't know what Key Exchange is. Please see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U62S8SchxX4 But I think somebody does. On 3/2/2016 12:06 PM, Tanstaafl wrote: On 3/2/2016

Re: [libreoffice-users] Thunderbird potential as the official/default email-client for LO? Re: [board-discuss] BoD decision from 2015-10-05

On 3/2/2016 11:32 AM, Paul D. Mirowsky wrote: > We're talking POP and Thunderbird. And like I said, POP simply isn't designed for such usage. > IMAP is a pre-existing condition. No idea what you mean by that. > The ability for POP clients to keep all of their shared

Re: [libreoffice-users] Thunderbird potential as the official/default email-client for LO? Re: [board-discuss] BoD decision from 2015-10-05

We're talking POP and Thunderbird. IMAP is a pre-existing condition. The ability for POP clients to keep all of their shared clients current is a glaring omission that should be rectified. I regret not having the ability to do this myself. IMAP is a security risk that increases the attack

Re: [libreoffice-users] Thunderbird potential as the official/default email-client for LO? Re: [board-discuss] BoD decision from 2015-10-05

Oh - not to mention that it doesn't even accomplish the goal. What about all of the email prior to adding 'Thunderbird 3' to the mix? Or your new phone? As I said, IMAP is the only sane, rational solution. On 2/29/2016 10:23 PM, Tanstaafl wrote: > Possible? Sure,

Re: [libreoffice-users] Thunderbird potential as the official/default email-client for LO? Re: [board-discuss] BoD decision from 2015-10-05

Possible? Sure, anything is possible, but this is way too breakable to even give serious consideration to. On 2/29/2016 3:10 PM, Paul D. Mirowsky wrote: > Each e-mail address has its own "STATUS" file. > "STATUS" file e-mails are not deletable from the POP mail server

Re: [libreoffice-users] Thunderbird potential as the official/default email-client for LO? Re: [board-discuss] BoD decision from 2015-10-05

Each e-mail address has its own "STATUS" file. "STATUS" file e-mails are not deletable from the POP mail server unless specifically commanded to delete them within Thunderbird via a separate command or when all "STATUS" files are duplicated based on time stamp. "STATUS" files are

Re: [libreoffice-users] Thunderbird potential as the official/default email-client for LO? Re: [board-discuss] BoD decision from 2015-10-05

On 2/29/2016 12:57 PM, Paul D. Mirowsky wrote: > While I do plead ignorance about mail servers, software resident on the > users machine can do what it wants. To a point, yes... > Since PGP already exists in Thunderbird, a server is not required for > updating. What

Re: [libreoffice-users] Thunderbird potential as the official/default email-client for LO? Re: [board-discuss] BoD decision from 2015-10-05

On 2/29/2016 11:33 AM, Tanstaafl wrote: On 2/29/2016 11:04 AM, Paul D. Mirowsky wrote: On 2/27/2016 5:38 PM, Tanstaafl wrote: Lotus SmartSuite was am integrated mail server/groupware solution. You're comparing apples and oranges. You are correct again. But the

Re: [libreoffice-users] Thunderbird potential as the official/default email-client for LO? Re: [board-discuss] BoD decision from 2015-10-05

On 2/29/2016 11:04 AM, Paul D. Mirowsky wrote: > On 2/27/2016 5:38 PM, Tanstaafl wrote: >> Lotus SmartSuite was am integrated mail server/groupware solution. >> >> You're comparing apples and oranges. > You are correct again. But the question is, how can we put the

Re: [libreoffice-users] Thunderbird potential as the official/default email-client for LO? Re: [board-discuss] BoD decision from 2015-10-05

On 2/27/2016 5:38 PM, Tanstaafl wrote: On 2/27/2016 2:10 PM, Paul D. Mirowsky wrote: One of the things I miss about Lotus SmartSuite is its' TeamMail function. A quick google suggests this is nothing more than Shared Mailbox functionality. That is Server

Re: [libreoffice-users] Thunderbird potential as the official/default email-client for LO? Re: [board-discuss] BoD decision from 2015-10-05

On 2/27/2016 2:10 PM, Paul D. Mirowsky wrote: > One of the things I miss about Lotus SmartSuite is its' TeamMail function. A quick google suggests this is nothing more than Shared Mailbox functionality. That is Server functionality, TB is a mail client. > It also

Re: [libreoffice-users] Thunderbird potential as the official/default email-client for LO? Re: [board-discuss] BoD decision from 2015-10-05

One of the things I miss about Lotus SmartSuite is its' TeamMail function. It also included Team Review, Team Consolidate and Team Security. It might be old school, but it worked. If Thunderbird could function within LibreOffice in a similar way, it would be a great addition. Support for

OT - Re: [libreoffice-users] Thunderbird potential as the official/default email-client for LO? Re: [board-discuss] BoD decision from 2015-10-05

On 2/27/2016 7:06 AM, Andrea Venturoli wrote: > Reliability aside (I really don't trust OL and I've got lot of backing > experience to support that), I've yet to find a feature in OL that TB is > missing (apart integration with Exchange). Actually, Outlook was designed first

OT - Re: [libreoffice-users] Thunderbird potential as the official/default email-client for LO? Re: [board-discuss] BoD decision from 2015-10-05

On 2/26/2016 8:49 PM, toki wrote: > From my POV, for TDF to write a new email client would be a waste of > effort. +1 > A couple of issues with TDF adoption of Thunderbird are: > > * What will TDF policy on breaking extensions be? > I have no idea if it was TB, or the

Re: [libreoffice-users] Thunderbird potential as the official/default email-client for LO? Re: [board-discuss] BoD decision from 2015-10-05

On 02/27/16 02:49, toki wrote: ^2: I don't use Outlook, so I have no idea what features Outlook currently offers --- other than reliable retrieving email under all conditions --- that Thunderbird does not currently support; Reliability aside (I really don't trust OL and I've got lot of

Re: [libreoffice-users] Thunderbird potential as the official/default email-client for LO? Re: [board-discuss] BoD decision from 2015-10-05

On 26/02/2016 23:30, Tim Lloyd wrote: > * 2 sets of developers - that should be fun :) It would be no more complicated that the Apache Software Foundation, or, for that matter, The Mozilla Foundation. > * Does TDF actually want to do this? Pretty much since OOo dropped (^1) the built-in

Re: [libreoffice-users] Thunderbird potential as the official/default email-client for LO? Re: [board-discuss] BoD decision from 2015-10-05

Hi Tom, from a user perspective, a great idea. Hpwever: * 2 sets of developers - that should be fun :) * Does TDF actually want to do this? Cue howls from sections of the open source community if the answer is yes * Is there any value in TDF writing its own mail client? It is good to get

Re: [libreoffice-users] Thunderbird potential as the official/default email-client for LO? Re: [board-discuss] BoD decision from 2015-10-05

I'd be fully supportive of bringing Thunderbird into the LO family. I've been a user of both for years and am very concerned about Thunderbird's future. The only Microsoft software I'm willing to actually spend money on is Windows, and I wouldn't even do that if there were a Linux version of

Re: [libreoffice-users] Thunderbird potential as the official/default email-client for LO? Re: [board-discuss] BoD decision from 2015-10-05

Tom Davies wrote: As most of you know - many organisations, particularly OpenSource ones, have departments/sections/sub-groups that focus on supporting external projects that are used within their own project. For example Ubuntu, Redhat, openSuSE, Mageia, Fedora (and so on) each have people

Re: [libreoffice-users] Thunderbird potential as the official/default email-client for LO? Re: [board-discuss] BoD decision from 2015-10-05

hi. i am realy advocate of opensource project and become happy to know about them and help people. its a good idea, but i am not expert in using thunderbird and dont have information about it. thank you tom. On 2/26/16, Tanstaafl wrote: > No, no, no. There is no

Re: [libreoffice-users] Thunderbird potential as the official/default email-client for LO? Re: [board-discuss] BoD decision from 2015-10-05

No, no, no. There is no reason. Or, at the very least, it is wy too early to even consider *thinking about* a name change for Thunderbird. Personally, I wouldn't necessarily be against it, but there would have to be a decent successful history of Thunderbird development under TDF

Re: [libreoffice-users] Thunderbird potential as the official/default email-client for LO? Re: [board-discuss] BoD decision from 2015-10-05

May should be renamed to LibreOffice Mail. El feb. 26, 2016 9:04 AM, "Tanstaafl" escribió: > I think bringing Thunderbird fully under the umbrella of The Document > Foundation, and as a sister project of LibreOffice, is a fantastic idea, > it just makes the most sense

Re: [libreoffice-users] Thunderbird potential as the official/default email-client for LO? Re: [board-discuss] BoD decision from 2015-10-05

I think bringing Thunderbird fully under the umbrella of The Document Foundation, and as a sister project of LibreOffice, is a fantastic idea, it just makes the most sense to me as a formal and permanent home for Thunderbird going forward. The fact is, in spite of the fact that Thunderbird