Wayne Mery (Thunderbird QA) vseerror at Lehigh.EDU
Thu Jun 27 18:12:26 UTC 2013

On 6/27/2013 12:05 PM, Gervase Markham wrote:
> On 27/06/13 00:26, Ludovic Hirlimann wrote:
>> Noise and unhappy people can be dealt with. I like Gerv's proposal. -
>> Maybe we should aslo get in touch with the Eudora team before changing
>> the page and retire the bugzilla component.
> The Wikipedia page on Eudora[0], which seems to have been written by
> disgruntled Eudora users editorializing, suggests that Qualcomm have
> been ignoring all communications regarding Eudora.

Perhaps "editorializing" is reading too much into what is written there. 
It is a fact that all communcations stopped dead.

My understanding of the situation is qualcomm decided there would be no 
further support, either formal or informal. *Even* to the extent that 
there would be no public communcation to users of that fact. Proof of 
that is none of the relevant pages were updated to communicate this 
"change in direction" after OSE 1.0 was released. ... ... ... etc, with the exception of 
some info about OS X Lion.

Note the primary citation of [0] is which may seem like ranting, but 
is primarily comments on the shortcomings of OSE 99% of which were done 
well before OSE 1.0 was released. The developers responded to a few 
points there but, as is typical of wiki, developers don't feel obliged 
to respond to everything.

> We can email the list
> of developers on the wiki page, but I wouldn't hold out much hope.
> Still, perhaps it's a necessary step.

IMO only worth it if there are obstacles to using some of their code.

> dascher or anyone: did we make any promises to Qualcomm which might
> affect our actions at this point, when they came to join us to do Eudora
> OSE/Penelope?
> Gerv
> [0]
> _______________________________________________
> tb-planning mailing list
> tb-planning at

More information about the tb-planning mailing list