Edgar Chen is now co-owning the Emulator module

[Thomas Zimmermann]

Hi!

I'm very happy to announce that Edgar (:edgar) is now co-owning the
Emulator module. He's been working on Telephony support and been a
module peer for a while. Recently Edgar was one of the driving forces
behind updating the emulator of our test infrastructure.

Edgar, thanks a lot for the work you did as a peer. I look forward to
working with you as module owner.

Best regards
Thomas
___
governance mailing list
governance@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance

Re: Edgar Chen is now co-owning the Emulator module

[Josh Cheng]

Congrats Edgar!

Well deserved!

Cheers, 
Josh
Engineering Program Manager, Firefox OS

> On Dec 15, 2015, at 6:16 PM, Thomas Zimmermann  
> wrote:
> 
> Hi!
> 
> I'm very happy to announce that Edgar (:edgar) is now co-owning the
> Emulator module. He's been working on Telephony support and been a
> module peer for a while. Recently Edgar was one of the driving forces
> behind updating the emulator of our test infrastructure.
> 
> Edgar, thanks a lot for the work you did as a peer. I look forward to
> working with you as module owner.
> 
> Best regards
> Thomas
> ___
> dev-fxos mailing list
> dev-f...@lists.mozilla.org
> https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-fxos

___
governance mailing list
governance@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance

Re: Thunderbird, the future, mozilla-central and comm-central

[Henri Sivonen]

On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 7:27 PM, Daniel Glazman  wrote:
> 1. Thunderbird is a standalone application embedding Gecko

I think it's obscures the issues to characterize Thunderbird as
embedding. Embedding usually means putting a Web engine inside a
native app. Using Gecko as the platform for the desktop app itself is
something different.

On Mon, Dec 7, 2015 at 4:45 PM, Paul  wrote:
> Thunderbird's primary existence should be to showcase the versatility of the 
> Mozilla Platform.

On Fri, Dec 11, 2015 at 10:26 PM, Ben Bucksch
 wrote:
> Thunderbird is not the only one. You probably have no idea how many there
> are. You get an idea when you look at AMO. There's more happening outside
> AMO, because it's internal or proprietary.

Let's look at some non-Firefox scenarios (some still possible, some no longer):

 1) Embedding
   a) Creating another Web browser with native chrome (Camino, K-meleon)
   b) Previewing pages in a Web authoring tool that uses a non-Web
toolkit for its UI
   c) Showing content from a particular Web site in a seemingly native
app affiliated with that site (common with WebKit on mobile)
   d) Showing local Web tech content like help files in a native-toolkit app.
   e) Showing content that's neither app-local like help files nor a
Web site: e.g. HTML email.

 2) Gecko as installed app platform
   a) Creating another Web browser with XUL chrome (SeaMonkey)
   b) Creating an authoring tool that not only previews content using
Gecko but is itself running on Gecko (BlueGriffon)
   c) Letting an app written in HTML+JS+CSS+SVG be locally installed
and do native-like things that the security model of the Web usually
blocks (some Firefox OS apps)
   d) The XUL platform serving as an alternative to Qt for writing
cross-platform non-Web-focused Internet-connected desktop apps that
need to render some non-Web HTML (Thunderbird).
   e) The XUL platform serving as an alternative to Qt for writing
cross-platform desktop apps that don't have much of a need to show
HTML content (Flickr Uploadr maybe?).

Which ones of these support any of the following?
 * Make the Web (not the Internet, the *Web*) better in general.
 * Drive usage of Gecko for *Web* usage thereby helping keep Gecko
relevant to the Web thereby allowing Gecko to serve as a vehicle for
Mozilla to make the Web better.
 * Drive the creation of Web apps/sites that work great in Gecko
thereby helping keep Gecko relevant to the Web thereby allowing Gecko
to serve as a vehicle for Mozilla to make the Web better.
 * Drive contribution to the Gecko features that make Gecko better for the Web.

In theory, mere usage of the Gecko platform for whatever purpose
regardless of XUL or HTML could drive contribution, but it seems that
in practice Gecko gets little Web-relevant contribution benefit from
any of the above-listed uses. Clearly, having a better embedding story
for WebKit and CEF has mindshare benefits for WebKit and Blink that
Gecko loses out on. But even if you look at WebKit, you'll find that
(apart from the time when Chrome used WebKit) WebKit has gotten very
little core Web feature contribution from all the non-Apple ports of
WebKit--most of the activity goes into taking WebKit to different
environments, which grows mindshare, but not to making the core of
WebKit better for the Web. (The effort to push WebRTC into WebKit
despite Apple may be an exception. And, like Gecko, WebKit has the
MathML exception.)

In theory, 1a and 2a could drive Gecko usage for Web usage, but in
practice the Gecko market share added by non-Firefox browsers has been
very small after Firefox on Mac got good enough to make Camino
irrelevant in terms of the Mac experience. (This aspect used to be
relevant when Firefox on Mac felt really un-Mac-like and Camino
addressed that problem. K-meleon never had a significant impact and
SeaMonkey has always been backward looking instead of taking Gecko to
new markets.)

In theory, 1b and 2b could be a big deal, but to have an big impact,
significantly more investment in this area would be required. With
Mozilla Corporation not investing in this area, e.g. Dreamweaver,
which has the big usage numbers, embeds Blink.

If 1c is an alternative to Web sites experienced in Firefox (or
another browser), the use case isn't really in favor of the Web but is
instead about trying to move users off the Web paradigm, which seems
like a negative from the point of view of advancing the Web.

The impact of 2c could be good for the Web or could be tangential.

1d, 1e, 2d and 2e aren't really that Web-relevant. In my experience
from meetings (which I don't get to experience often, since I work
remotely), trying to justify Mozilla Corporation's investment in them
by arguing from a Web-oriented mission doesn't work. Of course, for
people who have bought into using XULRunner as an alternative to Qt,
Mozilla losing interest in supporting XULRunner is a serious problem
and one that may be getting insufficient empathy. Still, appealing to
showcasing the 

RE: Edgar Chen is now co-owning the Emulator module

[William Hsu]

WoW! Congratulations, Edgar!

 

 

Cheers,

William

From: dev-fxos [mailto:dev-fxos-bounces+whsu=mozilla@lists.mozilla.org]
On Behalf Of Josh Cheng
Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 2015 6:22 PM
To: Thomas Zimmermann 
Cc: Edgar Chen ; mozilla-governa...@lists.mozilla.org
; dev-f...@lists.mozilla.org
Subject: Re: Edgar Chen is now co-owning the Emulator module

 

Congrats Edgar!

 

Well deserved!

 

Cheers, 

Josh

Engineering Program Manager, Firefox OS

 

On Dec 15, 2015, at 6:16 PM, Thomas Zimmermann mailto:tzimmerm...@mozilla.com> > wrote:

 

Hi!

I'm very happy to announce that Edgar (:edgar) is now co-owning the
Emulator module. He's been working on Telephony support and been a
module peer for a while. Recently Edgar was one of the driving forces
behind updating the emulator of our test infrastructure.

Edgar, thanks a lot for the work you did as a peer. I look forward to
working with you as module owner.

Best regards
Thomas
___
dev-fxos mailing list
dev-f...@lists.mozilla.org  
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-fxos

 

___
governance mailing list
governance@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance

Re: Edgar Chen is now co-owning the Emulator module

[Gabriele Svelto]

 Congrats Edgar!
I've been extensively using the results of your work in emulating
various bits of telephony functionality and I can only say *thank you*
for working on it!

 Gabriele

On 15/12/2015 11:16, Thomas Zimmermann wrote:
> Hi!
> 
> I'm very happy to announce that Edgar (:edgar) is now co-owning the
> Emulator module. He's been working on Telephony support and been a
> module peer for a while. Recently Edgar was one of the driving forces
> behind updating the emulator of our test infrastructure.
> 
> Edgar, thanks a lot for the work you did as a peer. I look forward to
> working with you as module owner.
> 
> Best regards
> Thomas




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
governance mailing list
governance@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance

Re: Remove Pocket Integration from Firefox

[dustinsherrill]

Nothing to add except I agree that Pocket should not be integrated into Firefox.
___
governance mailing list
governance@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance

Mozillians Website Sub-module Update

[Giorgos Logiotatidis]

I'm happy to announce that Mozillians Website Sub-module [0] is now
owned by John Giannelos (:nemo) [1] and Tasos Katsoulas (:tasos) [2],
replacing Andrei Hajdukewycz (:sancus). I'll keep my position as a peer.

This change reflects the current status of the Mozillians.org: John and
Tasos have been both actively maintaining Mozillians for more than a
year and I've been providing support whenever needed.

I've personally contacted Andrei (CCed) and he has no objections
regarding this change.

Best regards,
Giorgos

[0] https://wiki.mozilla.org/Modules/Mozilla_Websites#Mozillians
[1] https://mozillians.org/en-US/u/jgiannelos/
[2] https://mozillians.org/en-US/u/akatsoulas/
___
governance mailing list
governance@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance

Re: Thunderbird, the future, mozilla-central and comm-central

[Dirkjan Ochtman]

On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 11:59 AM, Henri Sivonen  wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 12, 2015 at 12:35 PM, Paul Fernhout
>  wrote:
>> The Mozilla mission page says, at the top, "We're building a better 
>> Internet", but then says lower down, "Our mission is to promote openness, 
>> innovation & opportunity on the Web."
>
> Note that the second sentence you quote changed from "the Internet" to
> "the Web" in early September 2012.
> August 31 2012:
> https://web.archive.org/web/20120831102626/http://www.mozilla.org/en-US/mission/
> September 10 2012:
> https://web.archive.org/web/20120910100207/http://www.mozilla.org/en-US/mission/

We discussed this on Twitter a bit already, but this is still very
weird me. Maybe someone from the leadership can comment?

Cheers,

Dirkjan
___
governance mailing list
governance@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance

Re: Edgar Chen is now co-owning the Emulator module

[Ken Chang]

Congrats! well deserved!

Thanks,
Ken

On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 8:50 PM, Gabriele Svelto 
wrote:

>  Congrats Edgar!
> I've been extensively using the results of your work in emulating
> various bits of telephony functionality and I can only say *thank you*
> for working on it!
>
>  Gabriele
>
> On 15/12/2015 11:16, Thomas Zimmermann wrote:
> > Hi!
> >
> > I'm very happy to announce that Edgar (:edgar) is now co-owning the
> > Emulator module. He's been working on Telephony support and been a
> > module peer for a while. Recently Edgar was one of the driving forces
> > behind updating the emulator of our test infrastructure.
> >
> > Edgar, thanks a lot for the work you did as a peer. I look forward to
> > working with you as module owner.
> >
> > Best regards
> > Thomas
>
>
>
> ___
> dev-fxos mailing list
> dev-f...@lists.mozilla.org
> https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-fxos
>
>
___
governance mailing list
governance@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance

Re: Remove Pocket Integration from Firefox

[Ian Bicking]

People on this thread may want to know that work is in place (and almost
landed) to move Pocket to an add-on:
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1215694

-- 
Ian Bicking | Engineering Manager | Hello | Mozilla
___
governance mailing list
governance@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance

Re: Remove Pocket Integration from Firefox

[Benjamin Kerensa]

I agree and it's disappointing when the first thread on Pocket was
discussed here Mozilla said there was no money deal to integrate pocket but
recently a VP at Mozilla admitted Mozilla is getting paid to integrate
Pocket.

That's a breach of trust to the users and Mozillians to publicly not state
the truth on why a feature was added.

We already saw tiles was a bad mistake so how many months until Mozilla
realizes Pocket was too?







--
Benjamin Kerensa
http://benjaminkerensa.com | @bkerensa on Twitter

On Thu, Sep 3, 2015 at 1:47 AM a  wrote:

> Please don't include proprietary service integration in Firefox core.
> Things like this and Encrypted Media Extensions should be Firefox
> extensions, presumably bundled with the browser but completely removable.
> The reading list feature worked great, I want it back. Pocket is visually
> ugly, and just displays a blank screen when I click on the button. I don't
> need more buttons, for goodness' sake. And, you're basically making the
> browser an advert for Pocket premium. That's bad in the same way that
> having a default search engine is bad. I install ad blocker for a reason.
> And, why the H--L am I having to complain on Google Groups, instead of
> something open source? I'm not exactly going to quit using Firefox because
> all the other options suck very very hard, but, AAARRGH.
> ___
> governance mailing list
> governance@lists.mozilla.org
> https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance
>
___
governance mailing list
governance@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance

Re: Remove Pocket Integration from Firefox

[»Q«]

In ,
David Rajchenbach-Teller  wrote:

> On 15/12/15 18:27, Benjamin Kerensa wrote:
> > I agree and it's disappointing when the first thread on Pocket was
> > discussed here Mozilla said there was no money deal to integrate
> > pocket but recently a VP at Mozilla admitted Mozilla is getting
> > paid to integrate Pocket.  
> 
> Wait, who did what when?

Maybe Benjamin has more info, but there is this:



   Although the company emphasizes that Pocket and Telefonica didn’t
   pay for placement in the Firefox browser, Mozilla Corp. chief legal
   and business officer Denelle Dixon-Thayer told WIRED that Mozilla
   has revenue sharing arrangements with both companies.
___
governance mailing list
governance@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance

Re: Remove Pocket Integration from Firefox

[David Rajchenbach-Teller]

First time I hear about that. Internal info is still that there is *no*
revenue.

On 15/12/15 18:31, Benjamin Kerensa wrote:
> Denelle recently talked to Wired and supposedly told them Mozilla's
> pocket feature is also a revenue sharing deal:
> http://www.wired.com/2015/12/mozilla-is-flailing-when-the-web-needs-it-the-most/
> 
> Chad Weiner has previously in defending the feature said there was no
> money involved.
> 
> 
> On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 9:28 AM David Rajchenbach-Teller
> mailto:dtel...@mozilla.com>> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> On 15/12/15 18:27, Benjamin Kerensa wrote:
> > I agree and it's disappointing when the first thread on Pocket was
> > discussed here Mozilla said there was no money deal to integrate
> pocket but
> > recently a VP at Mozilla admitted Mozilla is getting paid to integrate
> > Pocket.
> 
> Wait, who did what when?
> 
___
governance mailing list
governance@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance

Re: Remove Pocket Integration from Firefox

[Benjamin Kerensa]

Denelle recently talked to Wired and supposedly told them Mozilla's pocket
feature is also a revenue sharing deal:
http://www.wired.com/2015/12/mozilla-is-flailing-when-the-web-needs-it-the-most/

Chad Weiner has previously in defending the feature said there was no money
involved.


On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 9:28 AM David Rajchenbach-Teller <
dtel...@mozilla.com> wrote:

>
>
> On 15/12/15 18:27, Benjamin Kerensa wrote:
> > I agree and it's disappointing when the first thread on Pocket was
> > discussed here Mozilla said there was no money deal to integrate pocket
> but
> > recently a VP at Mozilla admitted Mozilla is getting paid to integrate
> > Pocket.
>
> Wait, who did what when?
>
>
___
governance mailing list
governance@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance

Re: Remove Pocket Integration from Firefox

[Adam Roach]

On 12/15/15 11:03, Ian Bicking wrote:

People on this thread may want to know that work is in place (and almost
landed) to move Pocket to an add-on:
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1215694



By my understanding, Pocket is being moved to a "system add-on" -- which 
I would probably call something more like a "Go Faster component.[1]" 
This is not at all the same thing as what users think of when they read 
"add-on."


As designed, the fact that "Go Faster components" are in any way 
different than features shipped as part of the Firefox monolith is to be 
completely invisible from users. There's some discussion on this front, 
but I think we need to be careful not to imply that Bug 1215694 will 
result in the ability for users to remove Pocket code.


There's some interesting related discussion on the go-faster email list 
("allowing users to disable system add-ons"):


https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/gofaster/2015-November/thread.html#191

However, as things stand at the moment, moving of Pocket to a Go Faster 
component will not be a user-visible change, and will not grant any 
ability to disable it any more strongly than they can right now (e.g., 
by removing it from the toolbar).




[1] Thanks to Kev Needham for suggesting this term as a less-confusing 
replacement for "system add-on".


--
Adam Roach
Principal Platform Engineer
a...@mozilla.com
+1 650 903 0800 x863
___
governance mailing list
governance@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance

Re: Remove Pocket Integration from Firefox

[David Rajchenbach-Teller]

On 15/12/15 18:27, Benjamin Kerensa wrote:
> I agree and it's disappointing when the first thread on Pocket was
> discussed here Mozilla said there was no money deal to integrate pocket but
> recently a VP at Mozilla admitted Mozilla is getting paid to integrate
> Pocket.

Wait, who did what when?

___
governance mailing list
governance@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance

Re: Thunderbird, the future, mozilla-central and comm-central (ThunderbirdS Are Grow! manifesto)

[Majken Connor]

This sounds like you've put some thought into this and are committed to
putting your money where your mouth is. I hope you get a thoughtful
response back!

On Wed, Dec 9, 2015 at 11:59 PM, Paul Fernhout <
pdfernh...@kurtz-fernhout.com> wrote:

> On Tuesday, December 1, 2015 at 7:47:58 AM UTC-5, Andrew Sutherland wrote:
> > The problem with Thunderbird is not that it is a mail user agent or that
> > user agency in messaging is unimportant.  The problem is that
> > Thunderbird has had a serious technical debt problem since the day its
> > code-base transitioned from Netscape.  Its low-level integration with
> > Gecko has been a maintenance burden for Thunderbird developers and
>
> To deal with this technical debt, I propose Mozilla fund a "skunkworks"
> team of seven people for a year to create a new server version of
> Thunderbird (called "Thunderbird Server") that runs initially as a Node.js
> app providing a single-page JavaScript/TypeScript webapp for email handling
> and other peer-to-peer communications using local storage. Thunderbird
> Server would assume Firefox as its primary client; Firefox would access
> Thunderbird Server just like any other (local) web server using web
> standards. The most significant Thunderbird Desktop plugins (based on
> downloads or other metrics) would be ported by the team to this new
> Thunderbird Server platform (ideally, aided by a custom tool for such
> porting). This Thunderbird Server platform would, through plugins,
> eventually become a social semantic desktop that would change the nature of
> the web as we know it.
>
> This is a feasible way to deal with the technical debt Andrew talks about
> while still being true to the idea of distributed data and peer-to-peer
> communications which is at the core of the Thunderbird vision. Sadly,
> Thunderbird Desktop itself would then be left to technical bankruptcy (or
> self-serve fixes) once the Thunderbird Server version proved stable and
> popular and the migration path was clear and easy. However, Firefox itself
> might benefit a lot from this effort via indirect means as it grew to meet
> new challenges posed by an expanding Thunderbird Server platform.
>
> I'd be happy to either help lead such a Thunderbird Server project myself
> or just help out with it full-time under another developer's leadership. I
> just applied as a "Mozilla Growth Engineer" suggesting something in this
> direction. At the link below is a manifesto I just wrote today about this
> idea with more detail on such a plan and a lot more reasons as to why
> Mozilla should fund this effort. But in short, the big issue here is, as
> Andrew points out, not messaging. The deeper issues is local data and
> peer-to-peer communications versus central data and client-to-shared-server
> communications and related privacy, security, and reliability concerns.
>
> Mark Surman said the Mozilla Foundation offered a modest amount of money
> to pay for contractors to help develop options for the technical future of
> Thunderbird.
> In a couple of months, building on the FOSS system I've already written
> called NarraFirma, I'm confident could produce a proof of concept of this
> Thunderbird Server idea even just working by myself.
>
> You can find the "ThunderbirdS are Grow!" manifesto here:
> http://pdfernhout.net/thunderbirds-are-grow-manifesto.html
>
> --Paul Fernhout
> http://www.pdfernhout.net/
> 
> The biggest challenge of the 21st century is the irony of technologies of
> abundance in the hands of those still thinking in terms of scarcity.
> ___
> governance mailing list
> governance@lists.mozilla.org
> https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance
>
___
governance mailing list
governance@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance

Re: Edgar Chen is now co-owning the Emulator module

[Bevis Tseng]

Congrats Edgar!!!
Well deserved! :-)

On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 10:03 AM, 陳柏宇  wrote:

>  Awesome and congrats Edgar!
>
> 2015-12-15 18:21 GMT+08:00 Josh Cheng :
>
>> Congrats Edgar!
>>
>> Well deserved!
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Josh
>> Engineering Program Manager, Firefox OS
>>
>> On Dec 15, 2015, at 6:16 PM, Thomas Zimmermann 
>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi!
>>
>> I'm very happy to announce that Edgar (:edgar) is now co-owning the
>> Emulator module. He's been working on Telephony support and been a
>> module peer for a while. Recently Edgar was one of the driving forces
>> behind updating the emulator of our test infrastructure.
>>
>> Edgar, thanks a lot for the work you did as a peer. I look forward to
>> working with you as module owner.
>>
>> Best regards
>> Thomas
>> ___
>> dev-fxos mailing list
>> dev-f...@lists.mozilla.org
>> https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-fxos
>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> dev-fxos mailing list
>> dev-f...@lists.mozilla.org
>> https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-fxos
>>
>>
>
> ___
> dev-fxos mailing list
> dev-f...@lists.mozilla.org
> https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-fxos
>
>
___
governance mailing list
governance@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance