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

Re: mutt's .mutt folders when saving attachments?



On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 11:54:19AM -0400, Jeff Kinz wrote:
> And if an elderly respected expert in a given field tells you
> RTFM, don't whine about it. RTFM advice is not (usually) an insult 
> or an attempt to be nasty. Its usually valid and ALWAYS a good
> idea. 

On the other hand, some people who offer RTFM as advice are neither
elderly nor respected.  And some just do it way too often, period.

I second David's well-said thoughts about the subject, especially in
the context of Mutt.  No matter how much I love it, Mutt's
configuration is intricate and complicated in the extreme; reading its
manual is a bit like reading a text on computer architecture.  It
contains lots of good information which is usually right (but not
always), but that is both a blessing and a curse:  IT CONTAINS LOTS OF
INFORMATION. :)  It's also, IMO, not very well organized from the
perspective of "I want to solve this particular problem with my
e-mail, how do I do it?"  Finding what you need in the manual can be
quite difficult, unless you know exactly what you're looking for, and
even then...  If you have time to sit down and read the 240+ some-odd*
pages of Mutt's manual, and you're very serious about managing your
e-mail, then you should do that.  But in the end, even if they do need
more power than what Pine or Outlook offer, most people just want to
read their mail.

-----
* as approximated by paging at 66 lines and counting pages until I got
  bored with counting at about 50%

-- 
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: pgpj5YB6Bod9y.pgp
Description: PGP signature