Proposal to start a new implementation of Thunderbird based on web technologies

Paul D. Fernhout pdfernhout at
Tue Apr 4 03:07:09 UTC 2017

Thanks, neandr! Here is more recent stuff I collected on the
React/Facebook patent issue including opinions from a couple of legal teams:

As indicated there (citing the next link), people are still (as of the
beginning of the year) still waiting on opinions from OSI and FSF about
the React license.

What's especially confusing about React's licensing situation is that is
has been under three license -- Apache, then a really bad version of
BSD+PATENTS, then a not quite so bad so bad version of BSD+PATENTS (but
still problematical).

--Paul Fernhout (
"The biggest challenge of the 21st century is the irony of technologies
of abundance in the hands of those still thinking in terms of scarcity."

On 2017-04-03 5:23 PM, neandr wrote:
> Following Ben's or Joshua's points about a next-TB it will raise
> questions which technology stack, tools, testing, design rules etc
> should be used, much more should be generalized for it.
> With the 'contacts/caldav' project which has been run last year at the
> New Zealand University it was obvious using a technology kit like React
> gives a great boost for productivity and structuring the solution. But
> already that small project -- compared what a next-TB will be -- showed
> also there are many possibilities for "dialects" with the various parts.
> So before starting the next-TB project it would make sense to have a
> common understanding for the technology base.
> Paul suggested a few points for the technology stack and more, he
> pointed to an important issues: legal aspects. For React there could be
> a patent problem, see here:
> ​And also Paul's contribution to a Drupal discussion about React usage
> is worth to read:
> React is used with the DevTools and it would be interesting to hear from
> the DevTools how they live with that patent issue. Thunderbird where
> ever it finds it's new home should be save from the start with new
> technologies and 3rd-party contributions.
> This is only one example why a serious analysis is necessary and
> stringent standards are an absolute must.

More information about the tb-planning mailing list