Thunderbird and Addons

Magnus Melin mkmelin+mozilla at
Mon Aug 24 20:02:45 UTC 2015

So far I've always been inclined to just follow what Firefox does, 
that's the platform we have to build on after all. If even possible, we 
don't have the resources to maintain such deviations and would just 
postponing a inevitable transition to whatever toolkit switched to. 
Since our release cycle is as long as it is with next release 45, then 
52 - even for the 52-release (or the next at the latest) there is little 
guarantee for those points to work out if Firefox has moved on.


(#2 is discussed in bug 1168571)

On 24.08.2015 21:35, R Kent James wrote:
> At this point, I think that the prevailing viewpoint is probably the 
> following, and I would like to announce this if possible in a blog post:
> 1)    Thunderbird continues to support binary addons.
> 2)    Thunderbird will not require addon signing.
> 3)    Thunderbird has no current plans to disable the use of 
> traditional XUL/XPCOM addons in Thunderbird.
> This policy must be modified by the caveat "as long as core Mozilla 
> code can be used to support it".
> (I might also note that initial patches are being looked at for the 
> integration of the technology formerly know as Skinkglue into 
> Thunderbird core, to be called JsAccount, which makes it possible to 
> define new account types in Thunderbird using a traditional 
> XUL/XPCOM/JavaScript addon. This will almost certainly be in our next 
> major release).
> Could I have some comments or discussion on these proposed positions?
> I hope the Thunderbird community appreciates that diverging from 
> Mozilla in this manner will probably mean that we will need to take 
> over addon review from Thunderbird at some point, possibly including 
> forking of AMO for our own use.

More information about the tb-planning mailing list