The infamous Mozilla core editor

Jörg Knobloch jorgk at jorgk.com
Fri Mar 6 06:15:17 UTC 2015


On 6/03/2015 00:25, R Kent James wrote:
> Just to be clear, there are no current plans to try to persuade 
> Mozilla to increase their support of areas that are important to 
> Thunderbird, either directly or indirectly. (This is partly because we 
> hear from multiple Mozilla sources that it would be a waste of effort 
> to do so).

This is the part that for a newcomer is very hard to understand. The 
architecture is such that a "core" product exists, call it as you wish, 
Mozilla Central, Firefox, Gecko, that is used by a plethora of "add-on" 
applications, Thunderbird being the most important one.

Mozilla actively "advertise" embedding their product:
https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Gecko/Embedding_Mozilla
https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Rich-Text_Editing_in_Mozilla

How can it be possible that a product actively used by other software 
and actively advertised to other projects is not maintained in a way 
that at least blatant bugs are fixed?

(Note: The other area Thunderbird is experiencing problems with is the 
"toolkit" used for auto-complete when entering recipients.)

> Our current goals are to operate as an independent project under the 
> Mozilla umbrella, to be allowed to raise funds and otherwise operate 
> as a legitimate, self-governing group. As far as we know there are no 
> serious policy obstacles to this, only procedural issues that we are 
> trying to overcome. 

That is fine and understood. However, the argument - as far as I 
understood - will be that Thunderbird is an important product supplied 
by Mozilla, that its usage is increasing, that there are many voices 
calling for better support, etc. So why can't one of the facets be 
better support for Mozilla's core product?

Let's waste the time and get a *clear statement* on that before ripping 
out the existing editor and replacing it with something else as some 
people suggested !

Kind regards, Jorg K.

P.S.: As Ehsan explained: The editor has two modes, the simple text mode 
which is used for - dare I say without being able to supply statistics - 
most text entry fields on the web, and the HTML mode used by Thunderbird 
and on rare occasions also elsewhere. I personally have not seen any 
website using it, although Ehsan once said he noticed an editor bug when 
using Gmail.

P.S.2: I'm happy that no one criticised my statement that it is 
important for the perception of the quality of Thunderbird that entering 
recipient addresses and text body works without obvious errors.




More information about the tb-planning mailing list