Thunderbird communication channels consolidation

Magnus Melin mkmelin+mozilla at iki.fi
Fri May 15 10:42:14 UTC 2020


On 2020-05-15 12:42, Jörg Knobloch (on behalf of) wrote:
> Jörg Knobloch wrote on maildev (I'm just re-posting here):
>
> On 15/05/2020 09:32, Magnus Melin wrote:
>> maildev mailing list 
>> <https://lists.thunderbird.net/mailman/listinfo/maildev_lists.thunderbird.net> 
>>
>>
>>  1. Most if not all of the maildev members are also on tb-planning.
>>  2. The list hasn't had too much traffic, since whether to choose
>>     this or tb-planning is not easy.
>>  3. Its original purpose of serving as a more moderated forum for
>>     technical discussion has proven generally non-feasible: details
>>     of technical decisions are better discussed on specific bugs with
>>     the people who have, or are gaining knowledge about the specifics
>>     involved.
>>
> Point 1: These lists have different moderation rules.
>
Maybe in theory. As a co-moderator of maildev I can only say the target 
moderation level can't be upheld. There are many posts that are in 
reality very tangential to the discussion, or would be more appropriate 
elsewhere. Rejecting a post from someone in the community still has a 
high bar since it's just socially acceptable in general. In practice 
what we moderate is more or less the pure spams.

> Point 2: These lists have very different purposes: For example, if you 
> want to discuss the pitfalls of Mork-removal, then tb-planning is 
> *not* the right list.
>
Correct, the specific bug would be the right place for that.

It's good example of where maildev wouldn't work either though: you'd be 
extremely lucky to find 5 people worldwide who claim any deeper 
understanding of Mork (a good reason we want to get rid of it). Reality 
check: unless you have a significantamount of time assigned to work on 
the itty gitty details of this and try it out until you get something 
working, for many things of this nature there's not that much discussion 
to be had.

> Point 3: Not-feasible? Why? We had a few useful discussions here.
>
Scimming the archives, there are *some* useful discussions, but not too 
many that couldn't have fit under tb-planning as well. I'd be curious to 
understand why someone would be on tb-planning but not want to follow 
any semi-technical discussions. All mailing lists will contain a doze of 
information you may not be interested in - that's just what a mailing 
list is.

Re why not feasible: see the Mork explanation above as one example. It's 
far from an isolated incident. Many times one would want input on 
something, that is in a very niche area and the number of people in the 
know about it (anywhere!) are counted on one hand. Expecting to find 
them on maildev is just not realistic. You just have to seek them out on 
a case-to-case basis, and even then it's difficult to get much feedback, 
as we've found for OpenPGP. As further possible examples: getting more 
of our code working as content instead of chrome (input from core DOM 
devs perhaps), enterprise story (input from enterprise administrators, 
ff core devs in this area), release engineering changes (ff releng), Tor 
functionality (Tor people, others working on Tor for Firefox).

   -Magnus

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/tb-planning/attachments/20200515/852a0aac/attachment.html>


More information about the tb-planning mailing list