Governance and Release Model updates

Gervase Markham gerv at
Wed Nov 14 10:05:40 UTC 2012

On 12/11/12 17:28, Kent James wrote:
> Unless I hear a strong statement otherwise, I am going to consider
> Standard8's "Therefore, paid-for development should not be considered"
> and your "efforts surrounding Thunderbird which generate income ... will
> need to be organizationally independent of Mozilla-the-organization " as
> definitive. We need a not-Mozilla organization.

I'm sadly not in a position to make definitive statements in this area 
(JB may be able to), but if the question is: "Is Mozilla going to go 
back to employing significant numbers of people full-time to work on 
Thunderbird, effectively reversing the recent decision?", I would be 
deeply surprised if the answer was anything but No.

So if people are interested in creating a not-Mozilla organization which 
provides support and services for Thunderbird, and employs people to 
work on the code, then that would be great. The thorny question is, of 
course: if they shipped their own version rather than sometime directly 
from Mozilla (e.g. if there were patches they needed which had not been 
upstreamed), could it be called Thunderbird? That's a tough question 
with a lot of grey, but I can see that the potential founders of such an 
organization would want some clarity on it before pressing forward.


More information about the tb-planning mailing list