On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 02:57:13PM -0500, Will Fiveash wrote: > On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 06:52:15AM -0700, Michael Elkins wrote: > > Was there ever any consensus on the trash folder patch. Some > > mutt-users were asking about it, and I note that Debian has been > > including it in their package for quite some time. > > If it can be done via macro then I would be against complicating the > mutt code base. Adding a feature does not automatically translate to increased complexity. Particularly if the feature is very modular, direct integration is usually the right answer, because it makes the user's life easier (i.e. there's no need for hundreds or thousands of users to all separately implement the same solution for the same common problem, and much less time is wasted discussing how to do it, as you can just point people to the manual when the question comes up). Even in the case where a feature genuinely adds significant complexity, deciding not to include it solely on that basis without considering its merits is the Wrong Thing (TM). This is generally a very bad argument against including new features. -- 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 due to spam prevention. Sorry for the inconvenience.
Attachment:
pgpEsDdi6LMsA.pgp
Description: PGP signature