p2p email: Virtual Email Institutions for Thunderbird
neandr at gmx.de
neandr at gmx.de
Wed Aug 6 09:07:24 UTC 2014
On 06.08.2014 09:33, Aceman wrote:
> I am not sure why you chose me as a relevant person in this discussion, but anyway.
> Of course I would love encryption everywhere. But it must be usable by most people. We can't push a solution that is incompatible with 99% of users. Not as the main encryption solution of TB. Instead, as a first step you were proposed to make it an extension on addons.mozilla.org and prove how popular it can become.
> Also, we do not currently have the manpower to include code as big as your solution. You were asked how vendor-neutral your solution is and if you or the vendor is ready to maintain the code inside TB/as an extension. I am not sure you have answered this so far. Maybe it got lost in the giant pile of work you have assigned to everybody else. Also I do not understand why you propose even more unrelated and too big projects (like qt conversion) on top.
to assist this from the view of an extension author!
Mozilla/Thunderbird is based on XUL/JS and some other components in the
"backend". That's the base for a lot of very useful extensions, one of
the strength of the Mozilla world.
The newer concept is the track with HTML/JS/CSS with some different libs
and tools. Think there are only few extensions which changed from the
classic XUL/JS track over to HTML/JS/CSS. That's because of the
complexity and the risk running into regressions ... "Never change a
Do you think it's worth for the users (and the extension authors) to
change the existing extension base to such a newer base (Qt etc)? For
the price to support only 1% of the user base as Aceman said? And even
if he is wrong by a factor 10, I don't see the value.
More information about the tb-planning