On Thu, Oct 13, 2005 at 08:11:14AM +0200, Thomas Roessler wrote: > On 2005-10-12 18:32:05 -0400, Derek Martin wrote: > > > 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. > > Yes, the idea of making the entire thing more modular, more > object-oriented, generally shinier and better is seductive. But it > requires someone with the motivation and time to do it. > > I, frankly, have neither. Sure, you've said as much in the past. The question, then, is: Is there someone, or a group of someones who are interested in doing this, who do have time and motivation? I have *some* motivation, but not enough time to do this myself. As I've said all along, it would probably require a group of individuals with diverse expertise, not so much because it is so huge a task, but just because there seems to be no one interested who has a lot of free time to devote to it. The other question is, if such a group emerged, would you be willing to participate, Thomas? I think your experience and expertise with mutt of today would be invaluable. I would ask the same question of the other maintainers as well. > (And, BTW, what you propose is far beyond "patches", but would > rather be a complete redesign and a rewrite of much of the software. Indeed, that is exactly what I am proposing. > You may even wish to reconsider the programming language used.) Well, for myself, I'm quite comfortable with C, and not much else, so were I to take the task on myself, C would be the language. -- 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:
pgpZfzdFmmhOj.pgp
Description: PGP signature