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

Re: RFC: enable support for smtp/pop/imap by default



On Wednesday, 14 April 2010 at 11:03, Will Fiveash wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 05:56:41AM -0700, Michael Elkins wrote:
> > Is there a compelling reason not to change the configure script to
> > enable support for these standard Internet protocols by default?
> 
> What is the compelling reason to change the defaults?  Currently if
> someone wants support for those protocols in mutt they can enable them
> via the configure script, yes?

I think defaults are there for people who don't know or don't want to
think about the effects of a choice. Knowledgeable users can say
--disable-imap as easily as --enable-imap. The defaults are for new
users, who should be able to build mutt with no options and not be
surprised by the behavior of the resulting executable.

In 1996, IMAP was a niche option. I'd argue that it isn't any
more. It's probably partly for this reason that all distributions turn
it on by default. So when ./configure; make; make install produces an
executable that can't connect to an IMAP server, I think that
surprises and puts off a lot of people.

IMO, changing the defaults is in line with the principle of least
surprise, now that networked mail has become so much more
important. So turning this around, what's the compelling reason to
keep the defaults?

Attachment: pgpEK0jPla4Ox.pgp
Description: PGP signature