Re: Thunderbird’s Future: the TL;DR Version
KaiRo at KaiRo.at
Tue Aug 12 01:57:30 UTC 2014
Axel Grude schrieb:
> Am 11/08/2014 um 20:42 schrieb Kent James:
>> <rant>I have been trying for 2 years to get permission to publish the
>> available data on Thunderbird usage without success. Yes we have data,
>> yes Thunderbird usage is growing, but these numbers are only available
>> to staff, and when shared with me privately they are always stated as
>> unshareable except in broad statements. Nobody seems to be able to
>> figure out who has permission to release these numbers publicly. </rant>
> Ok, this one I really don't understand. What's the point in an open
> source product when you can't share usage data?
The concern is and always has been what the press makes of that data.
Mozilla has been burned pretty toughly when this "ADU" ("Active Daily
Users") data was made public and showed ~160M for Firefox, while a few
weeks earlier there had been talks in a press release about how Firefox
had ~500M users. The result was press articles about how Firefox
"miraculously lost" 2/3 of its users, just because journalists could not
distinguish estimated amounts of total users based on market share
numbers (the 500M number) from an actual count of daily add-on blocklist
update pings that Mozilla Metrics ended badly naming as those "ADU" numbers.
After that bad press of "losing most of its users", policy was made to
1) rename ADU to "ADI" ("Active Daily Installations"), though I prefer
just calling them "(addon) blocklist pings" as that's what they really
are, and 2) not making those numbers public anywhere to avoid them being
I agree that it's unfortunate we are in this place, but I also
understand why we are. We even know that there's some basic flaws in our
ADI metrics, from not sending those pings in all cases where we probably
should to losing logs of pings on the server side (we are working on a
remedy for the latter), and the FHR metrics are much better in answering
usage (but I think neither Thunderbird nor any other non-Firefox product
All that said, being open source and using open processes for
development doesn't mean that all data that is collected through metrics
and feedback mechanisms has to be open. For privacy reasons, it's even
good that not all data sent to us via various mechanisms is public. It's
something we need to weight carefully.
Still, I think overall ADI summary data should be more easily accessible
(and when you know where, you can even get to some of it easily, e.g.
More information about the tb-planning