Thunderbird mailing-list / NNTP decision rationale
joesab2005 at gmail.com
Tue Aug 10 03:05:41 UTC 2010
On 8/9/2010 10:00 PM, Andrew Sutherland wrote:
> On 08/09/2010 06:10 PM, Bryan Clark wrote:
>> This isn't an attitude or a political statement and I don't think anyone is out to remove NNTP. I'm reading your messages as suggesting that and I don't think any of that is true at all.
> I think it's worth elaborating on this a little bit.
> No one has a problem with NNTP as a protocol or newsgroups as a concept. There are concerns about the complexity of the Thunderbird codebase as a whole and our ability to maintain and otherwise support the current C++ NNTP implementation given the
> current level of resources.
> If something happened where our options were between sinking a non-trivial amount of MoMo man-hours into NNTP or removing the current C++ implementation, I believe we would remove it.
Well, that "something" hasn't happened, and NTTP being a long established protocol, that hasn't changed in years, that event is very unlikely
to happen. So why mention it as if it is a drain on resources.
Certainly, there are much larger potential problems, like the continuing gap in the usability of the HTML editor, as it seems to have been
tailored for web use in contenteditable divs for Firefox of late.
That's a much bigger problem IMO.
Should we then make a pre-determined decision, that if goes to afar, we should then just abandon support for HTML compose?
> We would do this because, as noted, NNTP is not a MoMo priority and we need to focus on things that are priorities. If a contributor who deeply cares about the C++ news implementation shows up and has the time to help make sure that never happens,
> we can avoid that eventuality.
Poor choice of words
> The other possibility is that NNTP can be migrated to a simpler JS-based implementation, but that also requires effort that will not primarily come from within MoMo.
> Right now, Joshua Cranmer is the news sub-module owner. I am under the impression that he has a limited amount of time available and so the continuity of the current news implementation is not completely assured. If someone else magically appears to
> help out Joshua, the current low probability of removal could be further reduced.
Seems like jcranmer understands problems like the "newsgroup links not working" just fine.
With all due respect, fixing a relatively simple problem like that should supersede looking at reinventing the entire protocol implementation.
> The good news is that one of the things Joshua is spending his time on is a way for JS extensions to implement account types which would reduce the maintenance burden for news. The bad news is that his mechanism for allowing this currently depends on
> some scary and complex JS and C++ stuff which itself carries its own maintenance concerns. Back in the good news category again, bienvenu's back-end road map eventually includes work that supports custom account types that is less scary and I think he
> has some ideas for how Joshua's work could be less scary if Joshua has the time to follow-up on those. In the 'good news to some' category, my gloda plans will also allow for custom account types whereby one could implement NNTP in JS. I say 'good
> news to some' because it is not clear that the set of people who most love NNTP overlaps with the set of people willing to use gloda and all that it entails.
Certainly, I can see Gloda being useful in certain newsgroups. Those being of a support, or informational nature. But not newsgroups of a
"social" nature. And yes, there are more of those than most folks are aware of.(and most that I frequent are _not_ on usenet)
BTW, moderated and approved posts seem to be not to be visible to the poster that originated them.
To view this post, I will have to resort to Google. That's a real pain for this venue.
> tb-planning mailing list
> tb-planning at mozilla.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the tb-planning