Re: UI stuff (was Re: How to display format=flowed?)
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-mutt-dev@xxxxxxxx
> [mailto:owner-mutt-dev@xxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Derek Martin
> Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2005 5:32 PM
> To: Paul Walker
> Cc: mutt-dev@xxxxxxxx; mutt-users@xxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: UI stuff (was Re: How to display format=flowed?)
>
> On Wed, Oct 12, 2005 at 11:13:56PM +0100, Paul Walker wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 12, 2005 at 02:13:40PM -0400, Derek Martin wrote:
> >
> > [...]
> > > stubbornly against that idea. Greatly improved code modularity
> > > reduces the pain of maintaining patches that Thomas
> rejects, which
> > > thus reduces the barriers to people hacking on Mutt. And
> of course,
> > > all the
> >
> > To quote from the kernel guys, -ENOPATCH.
>
> Which misses the point entirely.
>
> There's no point in writing the code, if it has no hope of
> being included. So far, those in control have poo-pooed the
> whole idea.
>
Which doesn't mean a whole lot really. Mutt's been forked at least once
already. Write the code, and if it's rejected, fork. Mutt is a small
enough app for this to be eminiently practical for anybody who really wants
to do it.
--
Gary R. Van Sickle