<<< Date Index >>>     <<< Thread Index >>>

Re: mutt development status



On Tue, Jul 12, 2005 at 10:24:46AM -0700, Brendan Cully wrote:
 
> 1. mutt is a pretty good mailreader. 

So that people don't think I'm just a whiner, I do agree with this.
I have strong objections to the way new mail is handled, but aside
from that one aspect of mail managment, mutt is hands down the best
mailer there is, IMO.  If I didn't think so, I wouldn't still be using
it, and I wouldn't be complaining so much. ;-)

> 2. forks are bad. 

I agree with this also.  But what we have now is tantamount to a bunch
of small forks...  People are forced to maintain a large number of
patches, which lots of users want, which lots of Linux distros add by
default.  Recently a good number of these have been included, but
there are many more which remain discluded without any discussion.

By including them, all this patch maintenance stops.  For those who
don't want them, they have the option to simply not use them, or there
could be a runtime option, or for the most beastly features, even a
./configure option to disclude the code at compile time.

> 3. Thomas and I are obviously too busy

Yes. :)

>  but finding a trustworthy additional maintainer isn't easy. 

I bet it would be easier than you think.  This is the first I've heard
that you guys think an additional maintainer is a good idea.  I
suspect if you made an official announcement, you could find very
qualified people.  Mutt is popular enough that I bet even some of the
major linux-oriented news sites (slashdot, lwn, etc.) would pick up
the announcment.  There's bound to be someone around with enough
experience and free time to take on the challenge.

> 4. A BTS and a 1.5.10 followed soon after by a 1.6 would be
>    nice. Either GnuPG or sourceforge seem like they'd be suitable and
>    easy to start using. As I mentioned at the top, I'm not the one to
>    pull the trigger though.

Yup.

-- 
Derek D. Martin    http://www.pizzashack.org/   GPG Key ID: 0xDFBEAD02
-=-=-=-=-
This message is posted from an invalid address.  Replying to it will result in
undeliverable mail.  Sorry for the inconvenience.  Thank the spammers.

Attachment: pgpKOhQ7EjJkh.pgp
Description: PGP signature