Re: Governance and Release Model updates

acelists at atlas.sk acelists at atlas.sk
Wed Nov 14 10:33:57 UTC 2012


______________________________________________________________
> Od: "Gervase Markham" <gerv at mozilla.org>
> Komu: Kent James <kent at caspia.com>
> Dátum: 14.11.2012 11:05
> Predmet: Re: Governance and Release Model updates
>
>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.

I think this is an important point. Who decides what gets upstreamed? The module owners (for now). They will largely not be Mozilla employees. What if they become Swanfox employees? Then they can push anything Swanfox needs. I understand that then Mozilla would not be happy to have such a uncontrollable product under its brand.

On the other hand of Mozilla has any control of the module owners (or they are independent as today), how can Swanfox really provide any services or even contracts? There is no guarantee the Swanfox code gets upstream. They can push addons or a forked release (but not Mozilla branded).

Looks like a weird situation. Do I miss anything?

aceman



More information about the tb-planning mailing list