ongoing Thunderbird work after Tb 3.1

1 view
Skip to first unread message

Dan Mosedale

unread,
Apr 23, 2010, 6:10:20 PM4/23/10
to tb-pl...@mozilla.org
As we're nearing the end of the Thunderbird 3.1 cycle, the usual
questions about what's next have started popping up. With help from
drivers, I've put together a wiki page that describes, in general, what
we expect things to look like going forward at

<https://wiki.mozilla.org/Thunderbird:Thunderbird_Post_3.1_Plan>

Folks who wish to discuss this in more detail are encouraged to join
<https://wiki.mozilla.org/Thunderbird/tb-planning>

and post there.

Dan

_______________________________________________
tb-planning mailing list
tb-pl...@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/tb-planning


--
Subscription settings: http://groups.google.com/group/tb-planning/subscribe?hl=en

JoeS

unread,
Apr 23, 2010, 9:10:24 PM4/23/10
to tb-pl...@mozilla.org
On 4/23/2010 6:10 PM, Dan Mosedale wrote:
 As we're nearing the end of the Thunderbird 3.1 cycle, the usual questions about what's next have started popping up.   With help from drivers, I've put together a wiki page that describes, in general, what we expect things to look like going forward at

<https://wiki.mozilla.org/Thunderbird:Thunderbird_Post_3.1_Plan>

Folks who wish to discuss this in more detail are encouraged to join <https://wiki.mozilla.org/Thunderbird/tb-planning>

and post there.

Dan

_______________________________________________
tb-planning mailing list
tb-pl...@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/tb-planning

Post TB3.1 planning..Thoughts
I won't belabor the point, but just the fact that there was a TB3.1 with the emphasis there proves that Mozilla messaging is in fact listening.
I think it also shows that assume really can make an ass out of you and me..(Bad News Bears)

Assumptions worth thinking about in future releases:

1. Prospective new TB users are non-technical types who simply want to exchange simple text messages

Plaintext vs. html is a dead issue. Let it go and give folks an easy way to compose stylish messages.


2. MS Outlook,Windows Live Mail users are not likely to migrate to TB

Probably not , if we don't offer an easy migration path.And offer equivalent functionality.

3. Interoperability with other mail clients is a minimal edge case

While I would like to see all email interaction TB to TB that is certainly not the case.
An example of this is that we fairly recently defaulted all inline images to content-disposition attachment, which lost all inline images to Gmail recipients.
So TB just doesn't work in that scenario.

Bottom line here is a lot of folks are disenchanted with Outlook, and the MS decision to use the word html editor in html composition.
Word produces some very ugly html, but we make it extremely difficult to use the existing tools (html editor) to do much better.

I could cite bugs here, but I think that would do little to advance my position.

Oh, on the interoperability issue (Point 3) 99 out of 100 corporate mails received here are from MS based clients.(composed in html)
Replying to them "in kind" is sometimes a challenge for me. (And I have been using TB since the very early days 0.5)

--
JoeS




Dan Mosedale

unread,
Apr 23, 2010, 9:41:30 PM4/23/10
to tb-pl...@mozilla.org
On 4/23/10 6:10 PM, JoeS wrote:
Post TB3.1 planning..Thoughts
I won't belabor the point, but just the fact that there was a TB3.1 with the emphasis there proves that Mozilla messaging is in fact listening.
:-)

I think it also shows that assume really can make an ass out of you and me..(Bad News Bears)

Assumptions worth thinking about in future releases:

1. Prospective new TB users are non-technical types who simply want to exchange simple text messages

Plaintext vs. html is a dead issue. Let it go and give folks an easy way to compose stylish messages.
I agree with this, FWIW.

2. MS Outlook,Windows Live Mail users are not likely to migrate to TB

Probably not , if we don't offer an easy migration path.And offer equivalent functionality.

Indeed.  Happily, just today, we landed a patch that Phil Lacy put together to import settings from Windows Live Mail, which is a great step in the right direction.  (Thanks to Phil, Neil, and everyone else who pushed hard to help this patch land in time for 3.1!)  If someone is interested in putting together an importer for Live Mail messages themselves, that'd be a fine thing...

3. Interoperability with other mail clients is a minimal edge case
So I very much don't think this is true, and I'm not aware of decisions in the project that are treating it that way.

While I would like to see all email interaction TB to TB that is certainly not the case.
I actually wouldn't.  I think biodiversity is important in any ecosystem.

An example of this is that we fairly recently defaulted all inline images to content-disposition attachment, which lost all inline images to Gmail recipients.
So TB just doesn't work in that scenario.
This isn't something I'm aware of.  Do you have a bug you can point me to?

Oh, on the interoperability issue (Point 3) 99 out of 100 corporate mails received here are from MS based clients.(composed in html)
Replying to them "in kind" is sometimes a challenge for me. (And I have been using TB since the very early days 0.5)
Indeed, issues of that nature are typically worth filing bugs about.  Interoperability is a big deal to us!

Dan

JoeS

unread,
Apr 23, 2010, 10:21:37 PM4/23/10
to tb-pl...@mozilla.org
On 4/23/2010 9:41 PM, Dan Mosedale wrote:
An example of this is that we fairly recently defaulted all inline images to content-disposition attachment, which lost all inline images to Gmail recipients.
So TB just doesn't work in that scenario.
This isn't something I'm aware of.  Do you have a bug you can point me to?

Pavel Cvrček

unread,
Apr 26, 2010, 5:13:24 AM4/26/10
to tb-pl...@mozilla.org
Hi,

Dne 24.4.2010 0:10, Dan Mosedale napsal(a):
> As we're nearing the end of the Thunderbird 3.1 cycle, the usual
> questions about what's next have started popping up. With help from
> drivers, I've put together a wiki page that describes, in general, what
> we expect things to look like going forward at
>
> <https://wiki.mozilla.org/Thunderbird:Thunderbird_Post_3.1_Plan>

I'm missing something about Lightning. Integration of this extension was
removed from TB 3.0 plan and after that I don't know what is current
status. On our local community website users often ask this question and
I don't know what to answer.

What's current plan? Will be Lightning integrated with Thunderbird or
not? If yes, in which version?

Regards,

--
Pavel Cvrček <pcv...@mozilla.cz>
http://www.mozilla.cz/

Dan Mosedale

unread,
Apr 28, 2010, 8:27:30 PM4/28/10
to tb-pl...@mozilla.org
On 4/26/10 2:13 AM, Pavel Cvrček wrote:
> I'm missing something about Lightning. Integration of this extension
> was removed from TB 3.0 plan and after that I don't know what is
> current status. On our local community website users often ask this
> question and I don't know what to answer.
>
> What's current plan? Will be Lightning integrated with Thunderbird or
> not? If yes, in which version?

There is no current plan to integrate Lightning into the Thunderbird
core. In particular we believe that point 3, point 5, and the
conclusion from <http://ascher.ca/blog/2009/02/18/lightning_update/>
still apply.

Dan

Pavel Cvrček

unread,
Apr 29, 2010, 6:04:19 AM4/29/10
to tb-pl...@mozilla.org
Dne 29.4.2010 2:27, Dan Mosedale napsal(a):

> There is no current plan to integrate Lightning into the Thunderbird
> core. In particular we believe that point 3, point 5, and the
> conclusion from <http://ascher.ca/blog/2009/02/18/lightning_update/>
> still apply.

Thanks for info. Maybe it would be good to add info about it to
https://wiki.mozilla.org/Thunderbird:Thunderbird_Post_3.1_Plan.

Regards,

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages