About the future of Thunderbird(blog.mozilla.org)
blog.mozilla.org
About the future of Thunderbird
https://blog.mozilla.org/beyond-the-code/2012/07/09/about-the-future-of-thunderbird/
19 comments
software that is 'done'.
Kind of interesting that this doesn't appear to have explicititely happened very often before with email software -- but intuition might imply that it should have.
Kind of interesting that this doesn't appear to have explicititely happened very often before with email software -- but intuition might imply that it should have.
It should have happened with Thunderbird some time ago. Thunderbird is one of those programs where my heart would sink as soon as I learned there was a new update queued up. They always break something.
Oh come on, you love the multi-tab whatever that was forced on everybody. Thunderbird has definitely had some Gnome3-caliber failures.
The problem with their tabs is that they put different things on the same sized window. I like my overall Tbird to be almost full screened. But I like messages relatively narrow, because I (and people) generally read less efficiently if the lines are really long; it's harder to track back to the beginning of the next line accurately.
I like tabs in urxvt, vim, Firefox, etc. But they don't work well for me in Tbird.
I like tabs in urxvt, vim, Firefox, etc. But they don't work well for me in Tbird.
So far it has been much more common with say, networking code. Boring code which does what it does, and well you just don't need to rewrite it. Feature clamor in mail applications has gone way down with web based mail tools and smart phones. Much of the change in web browsers has gone 'internal' where its about faster JS execution or WebGL or something else like that.
Interesting times.
Interesting times.
> Kind of interesting that this doesn't appear to have explicititely happened very often before with email software -- but intuition might imply that it should have.
It most certainly did.
Pine
Mutt
Eudora
All are basically done, and are maintenance only. Pine turned into Alpine which added unicode, and that's about it.
There is actually a lot of software where this happens. Tex, and gzip come to mind immediately. I'm sure there is more.
It most certainly did.
Pine
Mutt
Eudora
All are basically done, and are maintenance only. Pine turned into Alpine which added unicode, and that's about it.
There is actually a lot of software where this happens. Tex, and gzip come to mind immediately. I'm sure there is more.
Speaking of features, does Thunderbird have a built-in Gmail-like conversation view yet? There's an extension, but eight years after Gmail, do people really still not want this enough for it to be a core feature? Many other email clients have it, and it's much nicer than a message list.
Disclaimer: I haven't used Thunderbird for years, but I'm not too satisfied with the clients I'm currently using.
Disclaimer: I haven't used Thunderbird for years, but I'm not too satisfied with the clients I'm currently using.
Still implemented as an add-on.
Thunderbird is far from 'done'. They had plans to replace somewhat problematic Mork format with SQLite based storage since 2008, and it was never implemented.
Software can't be "done". Webmail was done, then gmail came along. Phone calls were done, then google voice came along. Mobile phones were done, then iPhone came along.
I'm pretty happy with this actually, but still a bit worried.
Happy, because for once a company didn't see a perfectly good--but decade-old--piece of software and think, "Gee, this has been around for a decade and it hasn't changed, let's RE-INVENT EVERYTHING!!!" (See: Gnome 3, Windows 8). Thunderbird is stable, works, and does its job excellently; no need to turn a wheel into a square just because it's old.
On the other hand, there is still some room for improvement in Thunderbird: Gmail integration is kind of hacky and gross-looking (A "[Gmail]" folder? Really?), it could use better Linux desktop integration (notification icons, OSD bubbles, etc.--all of these kind of work, but in half-assed way, I've found). And of course, the ever-important security updates. Even stable software needs security updates on occasion, and someone has to provide that.
So with that said: kudos to Mozilla for not undertaking change just for the sake of change like so many other big software projects have of late; but I hope Thunderbird gets just a little more polish before it's placed atop its permanent pedestal, and I hope someone sticks around to keep it secure for its second decade of life.
Happy, because for once a company didn't see a perfectly good--but decade-old--piece of software and think, "Gee, this has been around for a decade and it hasn't changed, let's RE-INVENT EVERYTHING!!!" (See: Gnome 3, Windows 8). Thunderbird is stable, works, and does its job excellently; no need to turn a wheel into a square just because it's old.
On the other hand, there is still some room for improvement in Thunderbird: Gmail integration is kind of hacky and gross-looking (A "[Gmail]" folder? Really?), it could use better Linux desktop integration (notification icons, OSD bubbles, etc.--all of these kind of work, but in half-assed way, I've found). And of course, the ever-important security updates. Even stable software needs security updates on occasion, and someone has to provide that.
So with that said: kudos to Mozilla for not undertaking change just for the sake of change like so many other big software projects have of late; but I hope Thunderbird gets just a little more polish before it's placed atop its permanent pedestal, and I hope someone sticks around to keep it secure for its second decade of life.
The gmail folder is not thunderbird's fault. Its google's imap implementation. If you configure it correctly you should not see it.
You can hide it, but "Drafts," "Sent Mail," and "Trash" are under the "[Gmail]" folder. (Even though there's a duplicate and empty "Trash" folder above the root.) I check those frequently so it has to stay. I'm pretty sure Thunderbird hacks around some Gmail quirks already, they may as well hack around this one too while they're at it!
How do you configure Thunderbird to remove the [Gmail] folder. I can select which subfolders I subscribe to - but still the root [Gmail] folder is always there.
You can configure Gmail to not display certain folders in IMAP.
The [Gmail] folder is the result of IMAP being an afterthought for Google (but yes, Thunderbird could be better at hiding it).
"To be more specific, Mozilla will no longer focus on developing innovations for Thunderbird but will keep it safe and stable."
I am quite content with Thunderbird as it is and welcome this news.
I am quite content with Thunderbird as it is and welcome this news.
Happy to heard this, people working into extendible software should work into core apis and let the community build the rest. I was with very little hope when I saw the thread title. Thunderbid is the last application on wich I want a change. I was/am a Firefox fan, but I'm currently using chrome all day..
I think the chat integration is the last remaining puzzle piece. If thunderbird had builtin chat and builtin gpg support I'd be content. I have never understood why smime was baked in but gpg was not. Enigmail should not need to exist and unlike any other ff/tb plugins it used to be a pain with amd64...
Now that you mention it, yes builtin gpg support would be the last thing that I would like to see in it before they put it into maintenance mode.
Enigmail works great here. I don't really see a need to bring it mainline, perhaps other than encouraging adoption. I use 64-bit and have used Enigmail for 3+ years without issue now -- I think it's probably safe at this point, especially if you can install from your package manager (as I can with an AUR helper on Arch).
"Enigmail works great here" that's good to know I never said it did not. We can agree to disagree about it being in mainline and receiving the same attention and support as the rest of thunderbird. I don't think your "+3 years" have really exposed you to all the growing pains enigmail has had.
I agree, Enigmail has been around longer than I've actively used it (for the record, I had installed it occasionally before, but hardly used it). The point I was making is that it seems to be stable and mature software now, and that maturity has existed for a reasonably long time. Surely there's not much point in holding a grudge against software with a buggy past; that'd severely limit the pool of available software...
What about better Caldav support and Implementation of the Carddav ?
Chat Integration, who cares when you don't even have a decent addressbook integration?
Chat Integration, who cares when you don't even have a decent addressbook integration?
So couldn't they have avoided all this by saying it's going into "maintenance mode" or something? Software development history is full of packages that have fallen into bugfix-only status. Sheesh, what a lot of drama.
That's pretty much what the original announcement did say, if you go beyond the headlines and read the announcement itself: http://techcrunch.com/2012/07/06/so-thats-it-for-thunderbird...
There are decades of understandable ways to describe what is going on here, and they didn't use any of them.
Note that the email was intended as an internal (and confidential) heads-up to Mozilla contributors, not as a press release. And I'm not sure how "ongoing security and stability maintenance" is harder to understand than "maintenance mode."
Sure, and I agree, but it was buried in a whole bunch of really bad Business Writing(tm):
However, Thunderbird is one of the very few truly free and open source multi-platform email applications available today and we want to defend these values. We’re not “stopping” Thunderbird, but proposing we adapt the Thunderbird release and governance model in a way that allows both ongoing security and stability maintenance, as well as community-driven innovation and development for the product. This will mean an eventual shift in how we staff Thunderbird at Mozilla Corporation – we are still working out details, but some people will likely end up on other Mozilla projects.
However, Thunderbird is one of the very few truly free and open source multi-platform email applications available today and we want to defend these values. We’re not “stopping” Thunderbird, but proposing we adapt the Thunderbird release and governance model in a way that allows both ongoing security and stability maintenance, as well as community-driven innovation and development for the product. This will mean an eventual shift in how we staff Thunderbird at Mozilla Corporation – we are still working out details, but some people will likely end up on other Mozilla projects.
That sounds reasonable to me as an internal email. Basically, they're saying that Mozilla is going to stop active feature development and assume a role as a corporate BFDL (hence "community-driven innovation", i.e., "we may merge new stuff sometimes, but will mostly likely not be writing it"), and expect new people on your product's team soon.
I'm not sure what you're giving them a pass for here, why wouldn't an internal email be more clear?
I don't believe this was an "internal" email at all. It was sent out on a Friday, they knew it would get out. We were the intended audience.
I don't believe this was an "internal" email at all. It was sent out on a Friday, they knew it would get out. We were the intended audience.
>I'm not sure what you're giving them a pass for here, why wouldn't an internal email be more clear?
The mail seemed entirely clear to me. I think it was just not written in language suitable to non-technical people. I believe most people involved with OSS would recognize this shift into a community maintainer / BFDL as typical and non-threatening.
A "tech journalist" misinterpreted the letter as meaningless corpo-speak since he didn't understand the context or the real-life relevance of its content, and that's what sparked this whole thing about Thunderbird becoming dead. I don't believe it was meant to get spread in that way even if the execs thought some leakage would occur.
The mail seemed entirely clear to me. I think it was just not written in language suitable to non-technical people. I believe most people involved with OSS would recognize this shift into a community maintainer / BFDL as typical and non-threatening.
A "tech journalist" misinterpreted the letter as meaningless corpo-speak since he didn't understand the context or the real-life relevance of its content, and that's what sparked this whole thing about Thunderbird becoming dead. I don't believe it was meant to get spread in that way even if the execs thought some leakage would occur.
Thunderbird being open source, it can continue to thrive. Anybody can contribute. That's more than just maintenance mode.
How many of the active thunderbiord developers are not mozilla funded? I do not know, but it was my understanding that there were not many.
This doesn't mean those developers won't contribute to Thunderbird in their own free time as a hobby project. It also doesn't mean that an outsider interested in the project can't see an opportunity to pick up the torch.
Thunderbird is a very widely used piece of software without many adequate competitors and I think there will be plenty of people interested in tinkering with its code for a long time to come.
Thunderbird is a very widely used piece of software without many adequate competitors and I think there will be plenty of people interested in tinkering with its code for a long time to come.
Agreed. Reliability is extremely important with email programs, so I prefer this class of software be very conservative.
So, in other words, they don't care about it. However, enough people need it, so they can't kill it yet. For now, they have it on life support.
That's some serious newspeak, Mozilla...
"Thunderbird is not dead. We have announced a change in the way we develop new features for Thunderbird."
... in the sense of "not doing that anymore".
"Thunderbird is not dead. We have announced a change in the way we develop new features for Thunderbird."
... in the sense of "not doing that anymore".
"We have a solid plan to support Thunderbird until the second half of 2013 and are discussing how we support it beyond that date"
Kindof glossing over the issue, no?
Kindof glossing over the issue, no?
Exactly. If the answer is "Thunderbird is alive for about another year" then we may as well start looking for replacements now.
Because, you know, the day they stop committing, is the day that thunderbird stops working and takes all your mail store with it.
Oh, actually, that's not true! I'm still using TB3 installed with my Ubuntu 10.10, and there's nothing missing there. I'm sure that the latest 2013 TB is going to be usable through 2015 at least. No need to look for replacement now.
Oh, actually, that's not true! I'm still using TB3 installed with my Ubuntu 10.10, and there's nothing missing there. I'm sure that the latest 2013 TB is going to be usable through 2015 at least. No need to look for replacement now.
The original post announcing the change in Thunderbird's status, written by the Chair of the Mozilla Foundation:
http://blog.lizardwrangler.com/2012/07/06/thunderbird-stabil...
http://blog.lizardwrangler.com/2012/07/06/thunderbird-stabil...
And the most relevant:
https://wiki.mozilla.org/Thunderbird/Proposal:_New_Release_a...
https://wiki.mozilla.org/Thunderbird/Proposal:_New_Release_a...
I know their strategy is "everything online", but if 20+ million people are using it (from the article) then that market doesn't look like such a waste of time, does it?
I suspect that unlike Firefox, which actually brings in money (mostly from search engine referrals, specifically from Google), Thunderbird doesn't bring in any significant money, if at all.
Mozilla is a non-profit (or is it a not-for-profit?), but I guess they're trying to make each project self-sustaining, and if thunderbird doesn't provide any bacon (pure speculation on my part here), then -- yes, that market might look like a waste of time.
Mozilla is a non-profit (or is it a not-for-profit?), but I guess they're trying to make each project self-sustaining, and if thunderbird doesn't provide any bacon (pure speculation on my part here), then -- yes, that market might look like a waste of time.
Money is not why Mozilla made this decision.
For anyone working on software at the scale Mozilla is, this truth will be recognizable: focus can be a lot more important than financing.
Mozilla has and will continue to invest heavily in projects which have no or minimal revenue associated with them. Sustainability matters, of course, but there is no rule that every project or product must be individually sustainable.
For anyone working on software at the scale Mozilla is, this truth will be recognizable: focus can be a lot more important than financing.
Mozilla has and will continue to invest heavily in projects which have no or minimal revenue associated with them. Sustainability matters, of course, but there is no rule that every project or product must be individually sustainable.
I'm cross-posting here the comment I added to the mozilla blog:
[quote] Firefox went to live because of the IE dominance in the corporate and private world. In the same idea, Thunderbird went to live to offer an alternative to the Exchange/Outlook pair domination (and is still widely used in the corporate world).
We have a few very good alternative to Exchange outside (Kerio and Zimbra for instance) but Thunderbird lacks good Card/CalDav support which is a feature request that Mozilla has completely fail to deliver. And that’s were the real innovation was (think about it twice, please). Instead, we are seeing Thunderbird chat coming in. “Great”. Are you kidding?
Furthermore, I don’t get Mozilla communication ATM. When I hear “What Thunderbird users have in common is the need for a very stable and secure email product – first and foremost.”, I just think the guy saying that is making fun of the users.
Finally, as I said yesterday on Baker’s blog (comments), Mozilla should remove the Donate link on its website, as long as the long term goals are as unclear as they are now.
[/quote]
I also think that the decision to stop Thunderbird is based on a falacy: WebMail does not make e-mail clients obsolete, or even less important.
[quote] Firefox went to live because of the IE dominance in the corporate and private world. In the same idea, Thunderbird went to live to offer an alternative to the Exchange/Outlook pair domination (and is still widely used in the corporate world).
We have a few very good alternative to Exchange outside (Kerio and Zimbra for instance) but Thunderbird lacks good Card/CalDav support which is a feature request that Mozilla has completely fail to deliver. And that’s were the real innovation was (think about it twice, please). Instead, we are seeing Thunderbird chat coming in. “Great”. Are you kidding?
Furthermore, I don’t get Mozilla communication ATM. When I hear “What Thunderbird users have in common is the need for a very stable and secure email product – first and foremost.”, I just think the guy saying that is making fun of the users.
Finally, as I said yesterday on Baker’s blog (comments), Mozilla should remove the Donate link on its website, as long as the long term goals are as unclear as they are now.
[/quote]
I also think that the decision to stop Thunderbird is based on a falacy: WebMail does not make e-mail clients obsolete, or even less important.
What are the good alternatives for a lightweight IMAP email client? Outlook is pudgy and wants Exchange too badly.
Thunderbird. If you like how it is now, it is not gonna stop.
Folks, remember, the source code will be here, community contributor will still exist and contribute, etc.
Folks, remember, the source code will be here, community contributor will still exist and contribute, etc.
Mulberry (https://www.mulberrymail.com/) is, IMHO, the best IMAP client ever written, but from an IMAP perspective (and not necessarily a GUI perspective).
I gave up on Thunderbird when it started to demand most of my system memory. I switched back to mutt.
I gave up on Thunderbird when it started to demand most of my system memory. I switched back to mutt.
Drat, the best of the bunch was Eudora. But when Qualcomm abandoned it and turned it over to Mozilla, it became a lost child, stranded between its former self and Thunderbird.
That Eudora and now Thunderbird should be end-of-lifed makes for very few good free options.
That Eudora and now Thunderbird should be end-of-lifed makes for very few good free options.
There is Evolution that is worth taking a look at. But it was buggy and had problems with large mailboxes last time I used it (2 years ago?).
Even Ubuntu, which replaced Pidgin with the very inferior Empathy so they could be more "Gnomey", gave up on Evolution. I don't know that there's too much hope left for that one.
It was very promising at first. A simple no-nonsense IMAP client. But the buggyness is what killed it for me.
It seems like the spin is just making the situation worse.
Ok, Thunderbird is dead :(
sooooo please can someone at Mozilla fixes this YEARS old bug https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=531002 before TB's funeral ?
Also, thread conversations sucks and don't properly show new mails.
sooooo please can someone at Mozilla fixes this YEARS old bug https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=531002 before TB's funeral ?
Also, thread conversations sucks and don't properly show new mails.
Are there any stats around on how many people are using Thunderbird ? There really arn't that many usable email clients around - yet, perhaps next to the phone, email is really a primary way of doing business. It seems Outlook got most of the business users..
Outlook has a captive audience. I suspect email in non-business contexts will fade from common use before a decent email client comes along. Or maybe it will be for "fmail" instead.
> Are there any stats around on how many people are using Thunderbird ?
The article mentions over 20 million.
The article mentions over 20 million.
At the very least it confirms that their email client is not going to be part of their Social Browser:
http://blog.mozilla.org/futurereleases/2012/07/06/bringing-s...
http://blog.mozilla.org/futurereleases/2012/07/06/bringing-s...
If Mozilla is looking to reallocate R&D resources, I would suggest retiring SeaMonkey.
Seem's like they're trying to back peddle because they realize how many people like Thunderbird.
Back-pedal on what? Both the original leaked email and the official blog post said that Mozilla would "adapt the Thunderbird release and governance model in a way that allows both ongoing security and stability maintenance..."
It was TechCrunch who somehow translated that into "So, that's it for Thunderbird." :/
It was TechCrunch who somehow translated that into "So, that's it for Thunderbird." :/
You're right "back-pedal" was not the correct wording. More like address how it was received.
I think people reporting it just overstated the news that feature development will be stopped in saying it's dead. Mozilla's plan seems consistent.
Thunderbird has been dead to me ever since they completely botched search in Thunderbird 3.
The real question should be: Where the hell is the open source alternative of Gmail?
The most advanced open source IMAP based webmail was RoundCube last time I checked. Not really gmail, but works well enough at least for small to normal sized mailboxes.
http://www.roundcube.net/
http://www.roundcube.net/
How does roundcube compare with Zimbra?
it does not. rc is a light web client. its fast, its reliable and doesnt 6ave so many features. zimbra does a million thing. calendaring for starters.
Well, it's in your editor, waiting to be written! github just raised $100M to host it for you as well!
Seriously, there are a lot of open source mail servers/client, some of which might be good enough for you, e.g. http://cworth.org/sup/a-mail-client-for-geeks/
The main problem with running a mail server is properly keeping it up, secure, spam free, and trusted by peers to actually send email. These are not exclusively _software engineering_ problems with the existing (SMTP/RFC822-based) infrastructure. Rather, there's a large management component here, that is unlikely to be solved by software alone (open or closed source).
This will only change with a radical infrastructure change, along the lines of djb's Internet Mail 2000 proposal. Until then, if you want your mail server to remain reliable without working hard yourself, you'll have to delegate it (to google or hundreds of other available services).
Seriously, there are a lot of open source mail servers/client, some of which might be good enough for you, e.g. http://cworth.org/sup/a-mail-client-for-geeks/
The main problem with running a mail server is properly keeping it up, secure, spam free, and trusted by peers to actually send email. These are not exclusively _software engineering_ problems with the existing (SMTP/RFC822-based) infrastructure. Rather, there's a large management component here, that is unlikely to be solved by software alone (open or closed source).
This will only change with a radical infrastructure change, along the lines of djb's Internet Mail 2000 proposal. Until then, if you want your mail server to remain reliable without working hard yourself, you'll have to delegate it (to google or hundreds of other available services).
@beagle3, I'm not as powerful as Mozilla. They are letting Google occupy whole the internet by not creating an alternative for Gmail.
> I'm not as powerful as Mozilla.
Neither am I.
> They are letting Google occupy whole the internet by not creating an alternative for Gmail.
Now that statement makes absolutely no sense.
They have ~20 million users after 10-18 years (depending if you count from the original Thunderbird or the original Netscape 2.0 which added a mail client). Gmail has > 500 million accounts, let's say ~400 million users.
With 5% of the users, they're not making a difference either way.
Furthermore, it's still an apples-to-oranges comparison: I suspect at least 50% (if not 90%) of those mozilla users have at least one Gmail/GoogleApps mail account set up in their TB.
The main problem that gmail solves for most people, and which TB can't offer (being a software product rather than a service), is a reliable mail service. (I wrote that already, but you seem to have not noticed that).
> They are letting Google occupy whole the internet by not creating an alternative for Gmail.
Services available for you that are not google: fastmail.fm, hotmail.com/live.com, mail.com.
Mail clients that are available for you that are not gmail: Opera Mail, Claws, Postbox, Evolution, Outlook, Mail.app, and a whole lot more (though only Opera is really cross-platform).
What's the problem again?
Neither am I.
> They are letting Google occupy whole the internet by not creating an alternative for Gmail.
Now that statement makes absolutely no sense.
They have ~20 million users after 10-18 years (depending if you count from the original Thunderbird or the original Netscape 2.0 which added a mail client). Gmail has > 500 million accounts, let's say ~400 million users.
With 5% of the users, they're not making a difference either way.
Furthermore, it's still an apples-to-oranges comparison: I suspect at least 50% (if not 90%) of those mozilla users have at least one Gmail/GoogleApps mail account set up in their TB.
The main problem that gmail solves for most people, and which TB can't offer (being a software product rather than a service), is a reliable mail service. (I wrote that already, but you seem to have not noticed that).
> They are letting Google occupy whole the internet by not creating an alternative for Gmail.
Services available for you that are not google: fastmail.fm, hotmail.com/live.com, mail.com.
Mail clients that are available for you that are not gmail: Opera Mail, Claws, Postbox, Evolution, Outlook, Mail.app, and a whole lot more (though only Opera is really cross-platform).
What's the problem again?
interesting article. it does not really convince me though. very nice to get an official but informal statement.
Most people are familiar with software that is 'good enough to ship, could do more' where the software goes through release cycles and gets features added Etc. But sometimes, and this more common with embedded programmers, the programming is 'done.' All the features you could reasonably want are implemented, bugs as they come up are swatted, but basically the software itself is as it is and will be forever. Its done.
I expect to see more of this over the coming decade. While it is certainly true you can reimagine and reimagine, and of course you might want to port from form factor or OS to another, but the kinds of things that non-developer's do with computers is like a monte carlo plot getting more and more samples.
Personally I think its a Good Thing, as it might stem some of the gratuitous changes we see on things. It also has the chance of making the world a bit more stable.