<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
Kent,<br>
<br>
"We need a not-Mozilla organization"... but you still want to be
able to enjoy the 'Mozilla Thunderbird' brand? Can you please
explain how you see this happening?<br>
<br>
Jb<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 12/11/12 18:28, Kent James wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:50A131D4.103@caspia.com" type="cite">
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
On 11/12/2012 2:35 AM, Gervase Markham wrote:<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:50A0D0D8.2000607@mozilla.org" type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite" style="color: #000000;">
<blockquote type="cite" style="color: #000000;">
<blockquote type="cite" style="color: #000000;">For
Thunderbird to even attempt this <br>
direction would have significant risk and controversy, and
that is <br>
exactly the last thing that Mozilla wants for Thunderbird
right now. <br>
</blockquote>
<br>
I think it's a political reality that they will need to be <br>
organizationally independent of Mozilla-the-organization. <br>
</blockquote>
<br>
I'm so glad to hear you say that. It's been difficult to talk
about <br>
possible alternate governance of a future Mozilla-based
communications <br>
client without being viewed as anti-Mozilla, or trying some
sort of coup. <br>
</blockquote>
<br>
I don't want to be misunderstood; I was saying that if an
organization wants to go out and <b class="moz-txt-star"><span
class="moz-txt-tag">*</span>raise funds for employing people<span
class="moz-txt-tag">*</span></b> to develop the codebase, I
think it would need to be not-Mozilla. But then I point out that
Postbox tried something like this, and don't seem to have done
all that well. So I wonder whether it would work. <br>
<br>
However, I'm not saying that I'm in favour of moving Thunderbird
the product and brand out from the Mozilla umbrella. </blockquote>
Note that I used the phrase "future Mozilla-based communications
client" and not "Thunderbird".<br>
<br>
I've pretty much accepted that Mozilla for the foreseeable future
is not going to participate in any activity where Mozilla is
managing activities to pay for future innovation in a
communications client based on the Thunderbird code.<br>
<br>
If that is the practical reality, then the best thing that you
could do would be to continue to confirm that position. The worst
thing that Mozilla could do would be to encourage continued
discussion under the "Mozilla umbrella" about the issue, thus
sucking strength away from the not-Mozilla entity without really
providing a valid outlet for real discussions that have a chance
of changing something. (This is not an accusation that you have
done such a thing, only an encouragement to be clear about what
Mozilla is *not* going to do, so that others would have the
freedom to do it.)<br>
<br>
So when Vincent writes "about monetization, just wanted to
highlight the fact that, in my opinion, there is still a lot to
do" you would say "fine, but that is out of scope for Mozilla,
please discuss this with the not-Mozilla entity".<br>
<br>
Unless I hear a strong statement otherwise, I am going to consider
Standard8's "Therefore, paid-for development should not be
considered" and your "efforts surrounding Thunderbird which
generate income ... will need to be organizationally independent
of Mozilla-the-organization " as definitive. We need a not-Mozilla
organization.<br>
<br>
:rkent<br>
<br>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
tb-planning mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:tb-planning@mozilla.org">tb-planning@mozilla.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/tb-planning">https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/tb-planning</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>