<div dir="ltr">Should we ask the Module Owner and Peers to weigh in? Technically they steer some of these decisions while they remain in those roles regardless of our consensus. <br></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Sep 8, 2014 at 1:19 PM, R Kent James <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:kent@caspia.com" target="_blank">kent@caspia.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
I'd like to see if we can reach consensus on the general outline of
a reorganization plan for Thunderbird. I hope it is clear to anyone
that has been observing our efforts recently that there are issues
with our current direction. Some symptoms:<br>
<br>
1) The decision to confirm that we could spend Thunderbird income on
a gathering of contributors, as promised to the community at the
last reorganization, required intervention from the highest levels
of Mozilla.<br>
<br>
2) Thunderbird 31 released with very few new features.<br>
<br>
3) comm-central has been closed now for about six weeks due to
various breakages. This is really bad for engaging contributors, as
well as slows down development. Collapse of Thunderbird as a product
will start with long periods of time where we are unbuildable, so
this is the first hints of collapse.<br>
<br>
4) We have been unsuccessful so far at negotiating a resolution to
the issues of repository structure that are needed for reducing our
sensitivity to changes in the build system.<br>
<br>
5) The process to confirm that we can publicly release information
on our growing daily user count (which we sorely need to counter
market perception that Thunderbird is dying) has taken over a year
and is still not complete (though all indications are that we will
have that approval soon).<br>
<br>
6) The last entry on the Thunderbird blog was about one year ago, on
September 13, 2013. Other aspects of public communication, such as
release notes for Thunderbird 31, have also been inadequate
recently.<br>
<br>
At the same time, our user base is growing, and we have a strong
core team with good internal dynamics. Our product is strong, and we
are part of a proud brand and organization. We have everything that
we need to be successful, we just need to get behind a plan and
execute.<br>
<br>
I'm going to post the minimal outline of what I think is needed in a
separate communication, as I don't want to clutter that with the
long list of problems that I have presented here. That communication
will lay out key features of the reorganization plan, without too
many details. I hope that we can reach a general consensus on the
minimum plan in that document, and proceed to implement any
negotiations that are needed to move it forward. Details are
purposely omitted to try to get a list of the bare essentials of
what we need to agree to.<br>
<br>
One reason that we need to do this now, rather than wait for the
Summit, is that we hope to take the opportunity at the Summit to
prepare a marketing video that would be a key part of the strategy
moving forward. So we need to agree on pieces of the plan,
particularly the piece about approaching our users directly for
funding, so that we can do the video as part of the Summit.<br>
<br>
In the absence of a working governance model, one way that we can
proceed with a reorganization is to have stakeholders add their name
to a plan as a co-sponsor. What I will suggest is that I present my
document, we have some discussions, and then I will modify the plan
incorporating the input. Those who support the plan will be listed
as co-sponsors. When you read the plan and comment, consider that
you will be asked to be a co-sponsor of whatever we agree to.<br>
<br>
If in the end you cannot agree to the plan after discussion, then I
would strongly encourage you to offer an alternate plan. The plan
that I present may not be the perfect plan, or the only possible
plan, but we need SOME plan. If not mine, please present your own.
Or state clearly why you think that the status quo is working fine.<br>
<br>
Actual summary plan to follow.<span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><br>
<br>
-- <br>
<div>
<table style="width:100%" hspace="10" border="0" vspace="10">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td> <img src="cid:part1.07030605.00080709@caspia.com"><br>
</td>
<td>
R. Kent James<br>
Personal: <a href="mailto:kent@caspia.com" target="_blank">kent@caspia.com</a><br>
Business: <a href="mailto:rkent@mesquilla.com" target="_blank">rkent@mesquilla.com</a><br>
</td>
<td>
Web: <a href="http://mesquilla.com" target="_blank">http://mesquilla.com</a><br>
Twitter: @rkentjames<br>
Mozilla IRC: :rkent </td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<br>
</div>
</font></span></div>
<br>_______________________________________________<br>
tb-planning mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:tb-planning@mozilla.org">tb-planning@mozilla.org</a><br>
<a href="https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/tb-planning" target="_blank">https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/tb-planning</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br>Benjamin Kerensa<br>
</div>