<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
<title></title>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
<br>
<br>
On 8/9/2010 10:00 PM, Andrew Sutherland wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:4C60B2AE.7060702@asutherland.org" type="cite"> On
08/09/2010 06:10 PM, Bryan Clark wrote:
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">This isn't an attitude or a political
statement and I don't think anyone is out to remove NNTP. I'm
reading your messages as suggesting that and I don't think any
of that is true at all.
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
I think it's worth elaborating on this a little bit.
<br>
<br>
No one has a problem with NNTP as a protocol or newsgroups as a
concept. There are concerns about the complexity of the
Thunderbird codebase as a whole and our ability to maintain and
otherwise support the current C++ NNTP implementation given the
current level of resources.
<br>
<br>
If something happened where our options were between sinking a
non-trivial amount of MoMo man-hours into NNTP or removing the
current C++ implementation, I believe we would remove it.</blockquote>
Well, that "something" hasn't happened, and NTTP being a long
established protocol, that hasn't changed in years, that event is
very unlikely<br>
to happen. So why mention it as if it is a drain on resources.<br>
Certainly, there are much larger potential problems, like the
continuing gap in the usability of the HTML editor, as it seems to
have been<br>
tailored for web use in contenteditable divs for Firefox of late.<br>
That's a much bigger problem IMO.<br>
Should we then make a pre-determined decision, that if goes to afar,
we should then just abandon support for HTML compose?<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:4C60B2AE.7060702@asutherland.org" type="cite">
We would do this because, as noted, NNTP is not a MoMo priority
and we need to focus on things that are priorities. If a
contributor who deeply cares about the C++ news implementation
shows up and has the time to help make sure that never happens, </blockquote>
<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:4C60B2AE.7060702@asutherland.org" type="cite">we
can avoid that eventuality.</blockquote>
Poor choice of words<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:4C60B2AE.7060702@asutherland.org" type="cite">
The other possibility is that NNTP can be migrated to a simpler
JS-based implementation, but that also requires effort that will
not primarily come from within MoMo.
<br>
<br>
Right now, Joshua Cranmer is the news sub-module owner. I am
under the impression that he has a limited amount of time
available and so the continuity of the current news implementation
is not completely assured. If someone else magically appears to
help out Joshua, the current low probability of removal could be
further reduced.
<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
Seems like jcranmer understands problems like the "newsgroup links
not working" just fine.<br>
With all due respect, fixing a relatively simple problem like that
should supersede looking at reinventing the entire protocol
implementation. <br>
<blockquote cite="mid:4C60B2AE.7060702@asutherland.org" type="cite">The
good news is that one of the things Joshua is spending his time on
is a way for JS extensions to implement account types which would
reduce the maintenance burden for news. The bad news is that his
mechanism for allowing this currently depends on some scary and
complex JS and C++ stuff which itself carries its own maintenance
concerns. Back in the good news category again, bienvenu's
back-end road map eventually includes work that supports custom
account types that is less scary and I think he has some ideas for
how Joshua's work could be less scary if Joshua has the time to
follow-up on those. In the 'good news to some' category, my gloda
plans will also allow for custom account types whereby one could
implement NNTP in JS. I say 'good news to some' because it is not
clear that the set of people who most love NNTP overlaps with the
set of people willing to use gloda and all that it entails.
<br>
</blockquote>
Certainly, I can see Gloda being useful in certain newsgroups. Those
being of a support, or informational nature. But not newsgroups of a<br>
"social" nature. And yes, there are more of those than most folks
are aware of.(and most that I frequent are <u>not</u> on usenet)<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:4C60B2AE.7060702@asutherland.org" type="cite">
<br>
Andrew
<br>
_</blockquote>
@Dan<br>
BTW, moderated and approved posts seem to be not to be visible to
the poster that originated them.<br>
To view this post, I will have to resort to Google. That's a real
pain for this venue.<br>
<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:4C60B2AE.7060702@asutherland.org" type="cite">______________________________________________
<br>
tb-planning mailing list
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:tb-planning@mozilla.org">tb-planning@mozilla.org</a>
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/tb-planning">https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/tb-planning</a>
<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>