Re: Summary of the situation with the composition process — thoughts wanted

Jonathan Protzenko jonathan.protzenko at
Sun Jun 26 06:42:53 UTC 2011

Hi Ehsan,

Thanks for sharing your thoughts.
>> Given that we don't have that many resources to devote to the composition UI
>> (2.), this would allow us to cheaply get an updated, more intuitive UI.
> ckeditor is way more than just the UI for the editor.
> (...)
> What are the upsides of taking ckeditor's code, besides getting a new 
> shiny and sexy editor UI really fast? What are the maintenance costs? 
> Do they have tests? Do you have plans to address these downsides? 
> (Note that some of them, such as ckeditor trying to implement its own 
> editing features are pretty intrinsic parts of that project.) 

Well, yes. We have these long-standing bugs, the composition UI is not 
evolving (talking about comm-central/editor here), and we'd like to be 
more attractive to users. Please keep in mind that in the present state, 
we *do not have any resources to devote to this area*. It is fairly 
natural that we should seek to re-use some 3rd-party code. However, 
after the arguments you've brought, I start to feel like CKEditor might 
not be the best solution after all.

Given all the constraints above, can you think of any readymade editor 
that we could possibly reuse? Are there any plans on the Gecko/Firefox 
side to write such a thing? An embeddable editor for the web with a 
pre-packaged UI could be highly beneficial... (Only talking about the 
associated UI and dialogs here).



More information about the tb-planning mailing list