Summary of issues for new legal home for Thunderbird
R Kent James
A lot has happened in the last couple of months that affect the future of Thunderbird. I'd like to bring you up to date, and ask for additional input.
Financially, we started asking for donations, and beginning in July added a request for donations to the Thunderbird start page. As of the end of August, 2016 (after two months of asking on our start page), we had available funds of $176,000. It will be awhile before we can really determine what is likely to be a sustainable donation level, but it is fairly clear that we have a supportive community who is willing to fund a small group of people working on Thunderbird.
Concerning a long-term legal and financial home, a team of us visited the conference for LibreOffice in Brno, Czech Republic and met with the board of The Document Foundation (TDF) to evaluate whether there is a fit between Thunderbird and TDF as a possible long-term home. Generally the meetup in Brno went well, and we left satisfied that TDF is a viable partner that has a lot to offer for Thunderbird.
But there are also other alternatives. Software Freedom Conservancy (SFC) is still under serious consideration. Also, the likely resources available to Thunderbird as a project seem fairly comparable to other successful open source Foundations (and an order of magnitude higher than the typical SFC project for example), so we also are considering either a short-term or long-term plan to have some sort of independent organization (although Simon Phipps recommended against that in his report, at least in the short run).
The Thunderbird Council met to discuss the Brno visit, and try to understand what our actions should be. While there were diverse opinions on the proper direction, trying to synthesize the issues, really it comes down to two questions:1) Does Thunderbird believe that the long-term best home is likely to be an independent organization (typically but not necessarily a Foundation), or are we better off allied with others legally and culturally?
2) Does the existing Thunderbird team have the capacity (both
in available skill sets as well as leadership) to transition to
function independently of Mozilla? If we are lacking, which
organization is likely to provide those skills or leadership? Or
is this something we are likely to successfully attract, either as
volunteers or as hired staff?
As of today we have not reached a recommendation about direction for a legal and financial home. At some point we will reach a decision, and at that point we will likely need to coordinate with our future home the best way to announce such a decision. While we strive to maintain as much transparency and public input into this process as we can, at some point a quiet period may be necessary, but we are not there yet.
We would appreciate comments on these issues, either generally or with respect to your personal availability to be part of a transition process.
In addition, one question we struggled with was how difficult it would be to acquire the services of someone with the skill set to lead a transition (which is likely to be needed regardless of what path we take, but a stronger candidate would make independence a more achievable goal). Let's call this the Executive Director role. If you have any insights into this role, including 1) examples of similar open-source organizations that hired such a position, or 2) specific suggestions of people (including yourself) who might fit the role, we would appreciate hearing from you, either publicly or privately.:rkent
Treasurer, Thunderbird Council
Gervase Markham
Thank you for this summary.
On 03/10/16 00:22, R Kent James wrote:
> 1) Does Thunderbird believe that the long-term best home is likely to
> be an independent organization (typically but not necessarily a
> Foundation), or are we better off allied with others legally and culturally?
It depends on how close the cultural fit is with the organization in
question and, if the fit is not perfect, how much flex there is, and in
the inflexible areas, whether people are willing to tolerate a change.
Particularly given that six months have now gone by, I would advise
against spending time considering this theoretical question, and instead
spend time comparing the actual concrete options available to you, in
the understanding that no option is a panacea.
I think that both TDF and SFC are good enough options that there is no
case to go back to Mozilla and say "we can't find anything that works".
Therefore, you should look at the specific pros and cons of TDF and say
"is this, as a package, better than being basically independent but with
someone else handling the charity admin (i.e. SFC)?". That is the
question before you.
Gerv
_______________________________________________
tb-planning mailing list
tb-pl...@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/tb-planning
Óvári
Based upon Simon Phipps' recommendations, it seems that Thunderbird's
future organization home would best be under the umbrella of The
Document Foundation (TDF)
https://www.documentfoundation.org/
Initially, Thunderbird could be listed as a separate
project/entity/software on TDF’s website, i.e.
LibreOffice, The Document Foundation https://www.libreoffice.org/
Thunderbird https://www.thundernest.org/ http://www.getthunderbird.com
etc (A .org extension seems best)
The Document Liberation Project https://www.documentliberation.org/
Ideas for the integration of Thunderbird with LibreOffice
https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Ideas_for_the_integration_of_Thunderbird_with_LibreOffice
It would be appreciated if you would advise:
1. When the "quiet period" would likely happen; and
2. How long the "quiet period" would last for.
Thank you
Mark Rousell
I don't think this is a question which can be answered in the abstract. It depends on how close the cultural fit is with the organization in question and, if the fit is not perfect, how much flex there is, and in the inflexible areas, whether people are willing to tolerate a change. Particularly given that six months have now gone by, I would advise against spending time considering this theoretical question, and instead spend time comparing the actual concrete options available to you, in the understanding that no option is a panacea. I think that both TDF and SFC are good enough options that there is no case to go back to Mozilla and say "we can't find anything that works". Therefore, you should look at the specific pros and cons of TDF and say "is this, as a package, better than being basically independent but with someone else handling the charity admin (i.e. SFC)?". That is the question before you.
-- Mark Rousell
Michael Meeks
Thanks for the summary !
On 10/03/2016 12:22 AM, R Kent James wrote:
> so we also are considering either a short-term or long-term plan to
> have some sort of independent organization at least in the short run).
I had some exploratory discussions around potential structures to
accommodate Thunderbird at TDF. One reasonably attractive option - that
should enable you guys to change direction / entity in future - is to
have a special purpose vehicle - a non-profit corporate entity dedicated
to Thunderbird but owned by TDF. That has the flexibility to allow
future evolution into an independent organization if that's the way you
guys want to go, as well as some overheads as well as all such things do.
Anyhow - just wanted to throw that option into the mix here.
All the best,
Michael.
--
Michael Meeks, Director of The Document Foundation
Kurfürstendamm 188, 10707 Berlin, Germany
Rechtsfähige Stiftung des bürgerlichen Rechts
Legal details: http://www.documentfoundation.org/imprint
Gervase Markham
> I think that both TDF and SFC are good enough options that there is no
> case to go back to Mozilla and say "we can't find anything that works".
> Therefore, you should look at the specific pros and cons of TDF and say
> "is this, as a package, better than being basically independent but with
> someone else handling the charity admin (i.e. SFC)?". That is the
> question before you.
community (as seems to be the case, judging from this thread) then I
would encourage the Council to put their heads together on the specific
question above and demonstrate leadership by coming to a conclusion :-)
You can then start working in private with the chosen organization until
enough agreement is in place that you are in a position to publicly
announce the decision.
Alan Lord
> On 03/10/16 09:23, Gervase Markham wrote:
>
> Furthermore, if there is little input from the wider Thunderbird
> community (as seems to be the case, judging from this thread) then I
> would encourage the Council to put their heads together on the specific
> question above and demonstrate leadership by coming to a conclusion :-)
I lurk and follow some of the discussions on this list but do not feel
that I have nearly enough expertise or background knowledge to offer an
opinion on this.
Al
PS: My gut feel would be to go with TDF as they have done such an
awesome job with LibreOffice.
Mark Rousell
PS: My gut feel would be to go with TDF as they have done such an awesome job with LibreOffice.
-- Mark Rousell
Ben Bucksch
I'm going to revive this thread, because I think it's a pressing issue.
I'm very happy for Thunderbird to receive donations in this order of
magnitude, which means there are options to carry it forward.
As for the future home, I would appreciate the option of TDF.
They have done an awesome job with LibreOffice. They took an old and
aging codebase, and revived it, and made a great product out of it
that's really presentable. They also creating a vivid community around
it, which is also a great achievement all by itself. Today, LibreOffice
is a decent product with a future. This is something that both Oracle
and Apache Foundation failed to do.
One of the differences of LibreOffice is that it puts freedom and free
software values first. This is what excites and attracts contributors.
They believe in the mission. This is something that Apache failed with,
because it appears to me that they have a more laid-back, hands-off
approach, and this wasn't as appealing to contributors. TDF basically
empowers the individual, but gives this an orgnisational structure. For
example, their government structure is deliberately designed to prevent
take-overs from companies or strong individuals.
And I would pose that as one of the big advantages over the alternatives
of e.g. SFC. The Thunderbird project is still very young, and I don't
think we have the experience it takes to form a successful project from
nothing. There are a lot of delicate government questions to answer,
with far-reaching consequences. There's also the risk of copying some
other project structure which is less resilient.
We need something that guarantees the freedom and live of the
Thunderbird community, and the TDP structure is designed for that.
There's also the time factor. It's now 1 year ago that we were
discussing about this very question. We had the very same options - TDP,
SFC or new foundation - on the table. The last year has gone by, and
there's still no decision. It makes me scared to think how it would go
when forming a new structure (even when it's within SFC).
Frankly, I think this project is best-advised by taking an existing
structure that is known to both guarantee freedom and create a
flourishing, engaged community. To my limited knowledge, TDP is the best
option for that, and you can consider yourself very happy that they want
to be your home, and would accept you with open arms. Take these arms!
Please make a decision, rather sooner than later.
Ben
Robert Kaiser
>
> They have done an awesome job with LibreOffice. They took an old and
> aging codebase, and revived it, and made a great product out of it
> that's really presentable. They also creating a vivid community around
> it, which is also a great achievement all by itself. Today, LibreOffice
> is a decent product with a future. This is something that both Oracle
> and Apache Foundation failed to do.
>
> One of the differences of LibreOffice is that it puts freedom and free
> software values first. This is what excites and attracts contributors.
> They believe in the mission. This is something that Apache failed with,
> because it appears to me that they have a more laid-back, hands-off
> approach, and this wasn't as appealing to contributors. TDF basically
> empowers the individual, but gives this an orgnisational structure. For
> example, their government structure is deliberately designed to prevent
> take-overs from companies or strong individuals.
product basically, and that is LibreOffice. I feel that if Thunderbird
may join them, it will always just be an afterthought, ugly step-child
or whatever you may call it, in case case, (much) lower priority than
their (obvious) beloved baby and first priority that is LibreOffice.
In the end, TDF feel to me a lot like Mozilla, an organization that is
awesome or protecting their area of work, but that is mostly about one
single product, and has a risk of letting everything else fall over to
push that one product instead (which isn't bad in itself but not sure if
it's the best home for Thunderbird, esp. having been bitten by this once
already).
> And I would pose that as one of the big advantages over the alternatives
> of e.g. SFC. The Thunderbird project is still very young, and I don't
> think we have the experience it takes to form a successful project from
> nothing. There are a lot of delicate government questions to answer,
> with far-reaching consequences. There's also the risk of copying some
> other project structure which is less resilient.
multitude of different projects they have, and they leave any of those
to decide their own governance structure internally while consulting
them on that where needed and being able to take care of all the
administrative work, including legal work (they have lawyers on staff
for that). I have to mention though that I may be biased because I am a
paying supporter of SFC - I still like what TDF is doing a lot as well
though, I don't see support of them individually as an either/or. ;-)
> There's also the time factor. It's now 1 year ago that we were
> discussing about this very question. We had the very same options - TDP,
> SFC or new foundation - on the table. The last year has gone by, and
> there's still no decision. It makes me scared to think how it would go
> when forming a new structure (even when it's within SFC).
also agree that creating a separate organization alone is not a good
idea, it eats up a lot of time in administrative tasks, usually of
people who can and should do development.
> Frankly, I think this project is best-advised by taking an existing
> structure that is known to both guarantee freedom and create a
> flourishing, engaged community.
different shapes. In any case, I think both have something good to
offer, and can be a decent home for Thunderbird.
The direction to go for the software side is I think a harder decision
because there's not some good options waiting with open hands.
And on this bit from the original post:
>> In addition, one question we struggled with was how difficult it would
>> be to acquire the services of someone with the skill set to lead a
>> transition (which is likely to be needed regardless of what path we
>> take, but a stronger candidate would make independence a more
>> achievable goal). Let's call this the Executive Director role. If you
>> have any insights into this role, including 1) examples of similar
>> open-source organizations that hired such a position, or 2) specific
>> suggestions of people (including yourself) who might fit the role, we
>> would appreciate hearing from you, either publicly or privately.
fill big shoes like that, if some project management, data analysis or
so is needed, I'm open for part-time contracting (and maybe some
volunteering if time and resources allow - but being a Mozilla Rep and
paid jobs, as well as my own fun project and potentially some IRL stuff
all compete with my volunteering resources).
KaiRo