Change of release and governance model for Thunderbird

Kent James kent at
Wed Jul 11 03:00:39 UTC 2012

On 7/10/2012 5:34 PM, Axel wrote:
> I think one thing we should do is reach out to the and 
> other Add-On writers outlets to try and get them involved.
> I'd say there is a considerable amount of untapped know how out there, 
> so maybe the module ownership could be structured a little more and 
> some teams could be formed?
> For an outsider it is sometimes hard to determine who works on what, 
> and it might help if there was some feature/module-centric 
> (team)focus... what do you think?
By all means, we should be reaching out at this point anywhere that we 
can. But we have a bit of a chicken and egg problem here. People want to 
be involved in things that are happening, and the recent changes at 
Mozilla have left the taste that Thunderbird is dying. But if we get 
people involved, then its happening! and more people will want to get 

So at this point, what Thunderbird needs are a few key people to take 
what might be called a leap of faith, and commit themselves to cooperate 
with the nascent Thunderbird community effort.

Count me in.

Axel, I was planning on approaching you privately anyway to try to get 
you involved with the core code, so I'm quite excited to see your 
expressions of interest. Of the areas that you have discussed, I'd 
strongly encourage you to consider the compose/editor side of things, 
which I think is both more neglected than filters, as well as of more 
interest to a broader group of users.

> I think
> is a really good starting, and I would like to see more names and more 
> modules here - I would like to get involved in the Filter Piece :) . 
> Also for those of us who cannot spare daily IRC time, it would be cool 
> if weekly (or fortnightly) timeslots for module discussions could be 
> organized. One could then put out calls to the community for 
> participation if we need more manpower.
> If we had small teams of people who could cluster around certain areas 
> of expertise and we had some known leaders for these who can make the 
> final decisions or are the go-to guys for asking before somebody 
> attempts to patch something it also might make work more efficient. 
> (this might already be organized this way, I do not know the process 
> well enough at the moment, but some transparency would sure be nice).

The problem here is that very few areas have enough people involved to 
talk about a having small team. The most common scenario is that one 
person is hoping to do a major project, and solicits input from people 
in a variety of channels. I know that I, like you, have often craved 
better forums for collaboration though. For now though this 
(tb-planning) is it unless there is enough traffic to split it at some 

There was an initial collaborative effort along some of those lines this 
afternoon, sponsored by jcranmer (who I hope is also another "count me 
in" in this evolving process.) The results of that are here:

That is more backend focused based on Joshua and my background, but 
there is forward motion at least!

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the tb-planning mailing list