5 ms·

> The most important thing here is that there's now a serious plan in place to move Thunderbird off of XUL and XPCOM. Well it is only a six month contract for

> The most important thing here is that there's now a serious plan in place to move Thunderbird off of XUL and XPCOM. Well it is only a six month contract for a single developer.

carussell 9y ago
Sure, but the big thing is the "serious" part. We're basically talking about the patch paradox[1]. At any point in time, someone could have stepped up and made it known they were willing to do the necessary work to move off XUL. But without a similar commitment from upstream to accept a future involving a mail client built on web standard tech, it would be a wasted effort. Heck, Nylas even built their own such email client, relicensed it to a compatible license (GPL -> MIT), reached out to say, "please use this" and ask how they could help, and still nothing happened. 1. https://www.colbyrussell.com/2017/08/06/contributors-dilemma.html https://www.colbyrussell.com/2017/08/06/contributors-dilemma...
- nirv 9y ago
  There're many decent web-based proprietary mail solutions, and I was really excited once Nylas Mail showed up, even though it's Electron-based. And then instantly disappointed by its license. Later, I was considering switching to Nylas Mail when they re-licensed their open-source client, but turned out by "please use this" they still require you to opt-in with Nylas Identity tied to Nylas Cloud[1] They could only help replace free (from mail vendors) Thunderbird, playing by the rules of the Thunderbird. [1] https://github.com/nylas/nylas-mail/issues/3484 https://github.com/nylas/nylas-mail/issues/3484
  - carussell 9y ago
    > but turned out by "please use this" they still require you to opt-in with Nylas Identity tied to Nylas Cloud We're talking about Thunderbird development. When I wrote that they changed to a compatible license and reached out to say "please use this", that's not referring to their attempt to get users. That's a reference to their attempt to donate their code and energy towards improving Thunderbird. > They could only help replace free (from mail vendors) Thunderbird, playing by the rules of the Thunderbird. Huh?
    - nirv 9y ago
      > That's a reference to their [Nylos]* attempt to donate their code and energy towards improving Thunderbird. (*My edit in brackets) You meant towards improving Nylas Mail, not Thunderbird? If not, I don't get any sense in this argument, it sounds like Nylas was reaching out Mozilla to replace Thunderbird with their re-licensed Nylas Mail. I'm not sure that ever happened (and I'm not sure GPL is a totally suitable license for Mozilla Foundation[1]). If you made a typo and meant "Nylas Mail", then I get your argument about development, but I see how community (me included) would be reluctant to make any contributions into a not entirely free product without forking. > Huh? Simply put, I'm fully agree that upstream Thunderbird could clearly indicate their will to move off Gecko to stimulate code contributions from community. I see how it might work out for the already popular, long time-tested, free Thunderbird, but I don't believe Nylos Mail is the same case here. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozilla_Public_License https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozilla_Public_License
      - carussell 9y ago
        > My edit in brackets) You meant towards improving Nylas Mail, not Thunderbird? No. What I wrote is what I meant. > it sounds like Nylas was reaching out Mozilla to replace Thunderbird with their re-licensed Nylas Mail Yes. (But not "replace", necessarily. Replace parts. Merge. Improve.) > I'm not sure that ever happened Uh, okay? If you hadn't heard that before, that's... fine. But, I mean, now you have. And I don't know what else to say. > I'm not sure GPL is a totally suitable license for Mozilla Foundation You're right; it's not. Thunderbird is MPL. They can't accept GPL contributions and continue to make releases available under MPL. That's why I specifically mentioned how Nylas relicensed their code to one that is compatible (MIT). > I'm fully agree that upstream Thunderbird could clearly indicate their will to move off Gecko I didn't say move off Gecko. I said dropping XUL. Moving off Gecko is almost definitely not in plans for the short term, and probably not even in the long term. This conversation has been excruciating.
        nirv 9y ago
        > Nylas relicensed their code to one that is compatible (MIT) I was sure it's GPL, I missed that point. > Uh, okay? If you hadn't heard that before, that's... fine. > But, I mean, now you have. And I don't know what else to say. > This conversation has been excruciating. LOL, too much drama for the product below the radar. I can't even google anything about this proposal.

> The most important thing here is that there's now a serious plan in place to move Thunderbird off of XUL and XPCOM. Well it is only a six month contract for a single developer.

carussell 9y ago

Sure, but the big thing is the "serious" part. We're basically talking about the patch paradox[1]. At any point in time, someone could have stepped up and made it known they were willing to do the necessary work to move off XUL. But without a similar commitment from upstream to accept a future involving a mail client built on web standard tech, it would be a wasted effort. Heck, Nylas even built their own such email client, relicensed it to a compatible license (GPL -> MIT), reached out to say, "please use this" and ask how they could help, and still nothing happened. 1. https://www.colbyrussell.com/2017/08/06/contributors-dilemma.html https://www.colbyrussell.com/2017/08/06/contributors-dilemma...

nirv 9y ago
There're many decent web-based proprietary mail solutions, and I was really excited once Nylas Mail showed up, even though it's Electron-based. And then instantly disappointed by its license. Later, I was considering switching to Nylas Mail when they re-licensed their open-source client, but turned out by "please use this" they still require you to opt-in with Nylas Identity tied to Nylas Cloud[1] They could only help replace free (from mail vendors) Thunderbird, playing by the rules of the Thunderbird. [1] https://github.com/nylas/nylas-mail/issues/3484 https://github.com/nylas/nylas-mail/issues/3484
- carussell 9y ago
  > but turned out by "please use this" they still require you to opt-in with Nylas Identity tied to Nylas Cloud We're talking about Thunderbird development. When I wrote that they changed to a compatible license and reached out to say "please use this", that's not referring to their attempt to get users. That's a reference to their attempt to donate their code and energy towards improving Thunderbird. > They could only help replace free (from mail vendors) Thunderbird, playing by the rules of the Thunderbird. Huh?
  - nirv 9y ago
    > That's a reference to their [Nylos]* attempt to donate their code and energy towards improving Thunderbird. (*My edit in brackets) You meant towards improving Nylas Mail, not Thunderbird? If not, I don't get any sense in this argument, it sounds like Nylas was reaching out Mozilla to replace Thunderbird with their re-licensed Nylas Mail. I'm not sure that ever happened (and I'm not sure GPL is a totally suitable license for Mozilla Foundation[1]). If you made a typo and meant "Nylas Mail", then I get your argument about development, but I see how community (me included) would be reluctant to make any contributions into a not entirely free product without forking. > Huh? Simply put, I'm fully agree that upstream Thunderbird could clearly indicate their will to move off Gecko to stimulate code contributions from community. I see how it might work out for the already popular, long time-tested, free Thunderbird, but I don't believe Nylos Mail is the same case here. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozilla_Public_License https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozilla_Public_License
    - carussell 9y ago
      > My edit in brackets) You meant towards improving Nylas Mail, not Thunderbird? No. What I wrote is what I meant. > it sounds like Nylas was reaching out Mozilla to replace Thunderbird with their re-licensed Nylas Mail Yes. (But not "replace", necessarily. Replace parts. Merge. Improve.) > I'm not sure that ever happened Uh, okay? If you hadn't heard that before, that's... fine. But, I mean, now you have. And I don't know what else to say. > I'm not sure GPL is a totally suitable license for Mozilla Foundation You're right; it's not. Thunderbird is MPL. They can't accept GPL contributions and continue to make releases available under MPL. That's why I specifically mentioned how Nylas relicensed their code to one that is compatible (MIT). > I'm fully agree that upstream Thunderbird could clearly indicate their will to move off Gecko I didn't say move off Gecko. I said dropping XUL. Moving off Gecko is almost definitely not in plans for the short term, and probably not even in the long term. This conversation has been excruciating.
      - nirv 9y ago
        > Nylas relicensed their code to one that is compatible (MIT) I was sure it's GPL, I missed that point. > Uh, okay? If you hadn't heard that before, that's... fine. > But, I mean, now you have. And I don't know what else to say. > This conversation has been excruciating. LOL, too much drama for the product below the radar. I can't even google anything about this proposal.