<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=windows-1252">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 21/11/2016 10:18, Gervase Markham
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:15967b72-36d3-6a5e-ac25-16d5c8330aaf@mozilla.org">
<pre wrap="">On 20/11/16 12:47, Philipp Kewisch wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite" style="color: #000000;">
<pre wrap="">Sarcasm is not putting things positive. I've tried to state this in
multiple ways and it doesn't seem to resonate. I would like to find some
encouragement for Monterail to continue to contribute.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">This seems eminently sensible. I agree that the tone so far on this
thread has not been "what good can we find in this?" but "let's have a
whine and a moan about Thunderbird's lack of manpower and all of the
stuff we don't like about the mockup". Neither of these things is going
to lead to more contributors - if anything, they will lead to fewer.
I would say that "redesign" is the wrong word for what they've done, as
all of the same functions are in the same places (as far as I can see).
This is really a reskin, ...</pre>
</blockquote>
<p>I apologize for the sarcasm. As I said, I was put off by the word
"redesign" since Thunderbird faces some real redesign issues.
Putting a more "modern" face onto it doesn't solve those issues.
And since we don't have unlimited resources, it would be good to
keep the program running since a good-looking but dead program
isn't of any use.<br>
</p>
<p>The mock-up that was presented looks nice and if modernising the
UI</p>
<ul>
<li>brings in new donating users</li>
<li>doesn't get forced upon old-school people who don't want it</li>
<li>doesn't cause performance issues</li>
<li>doesn't lose existing users</li>
</ul>
<p>then there's nothing wrong with it. It would be good to get some
data to prove these points.<br>
</p>
<p>Jörg.<br>
</p>
</body>
</html>