Invitation for technical discussion on next-generation Thunderbird (Semantic Desktop)

Gervase Markham gerv at
Fri Apr 28 13:49:52 UTC 2017

On 25/04/17 04:26, Paul D. Fernhout wrote:
> The following is why I feel TB:NG should be designed to support billions
> of messages of a wide variety of types.

This really sounds like architecture astronautics.

> So, for me, a good assumption is that people will eventually have
> billions of message items comprising terabytes of data in their local
> (shared-with-email) store.

I don't think that's a good assumption at all, because the "delete"
button exists. Who has access to their text messages from 10 years ago?
I think I do, but then I'm a data migration geek. I doubt one person in
100 does. People don't want to manage this much data.

> I understand that such a vision of messaging on that scale is not yet
> the goal of most people in this discussion right now. But I'd still urge
> people to think a little beyond redoing Thunderbird as-it-is and try to
> imagine a personal messaging system that processes, archives, indexes,
> and recalls vast numbers of items every day in interaction with a user
> and automated systems as part of a larger federation of similar systems
> using shared semantic standards.

"Let's build a framework!"

Sorry :-)

> especially most recently Nylas Mail 2.0, it's harder to say yet another
> system is worth writing at all.

I would certainly be interested in the comments of those thinking about
TB++ as to why it would not be a quicker route to our goal to
collaborate on or build on top of Nylas. Is it just our pride that makes
us want to build a new Thunderbird from the ground up?


More information about the tb-planning mailing list