On Wed, Dec 10, 2003 at 05:05:12AM -0200, Rodrigo Bernardo Pimentel wrote: > On Tue, Dec 09 2003 at 07:08:01PM BRST, David Yitzchak Cohen > <lists+mutt_users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > I wonder whether an easy way to sidestep the problem is to set $tunnel > > > > to an IMAP proxy on the local machine that'll automatically reconnect > > > > when the connection's lost. . . > > > > > > It could work, yes. But that's not really a solution, as you waid > > > it's a workaround. > > > > Mutt's real advantage over other open-source mailers is that workarounds > > can provide almost full relief from problems until somebody gets > > the chance to fix the program itself. My version of Mutt is 100% > > unpatched :-) > > Mine is patched, including patches I wrote (and were completely > ignored in mutt-dev, though I must say I "only" sent e-mails, I haven't yet > filed a wishlist bug report) and some patches which I can't see why wouldn't > go in the distribution (automatically forgetting wrong gpg passwords, for > example). So people *got* the chance to fix the program itself, only their > fixes weren't allowed in for some reason. I was able to find the page with your config files (although the configs don't appear to be there), but I can't find any mention of your patches (except doing a search through my mutt-dev archives). Just out of curiosity, why don't you maintain a page with your patches? If you don't want to, I can host them on my own Web. (If people can find your patches, more will use 'em. If more use 'em, more will propose that they be incorperated officially.) > Especially with that in mind, I'd much rather have a 3rd party patch > than a workaround. I tend to like doing my own thing, so I prefer to make my own utilities than to patch others' programs. The more MUA functionality I have implemented in a modular fashion (which is the way I program/script everything I write), the easier it is for me to keep my configuration up-to-date as Mutt changes (since fewer changes affect me out of necessity). It also leaves me the door open to switch to another MUA if it should turn out to suck less than Mutt. I believe my config makes use of more external scripts/programs than anybody else's, and much of my config's power/flexibility comes from that fact. A workaround for one problem often turns out to be half a workaround for another problem, as well, and completing the workaround for the latter problem turns out to be half a workaround for yet another problem, etc. Having said that, I have nothing against others' patches. It's just that most patches aren't kept up-to-date with Mutt's CVS HEAD, and it's a pain updating them myself every time I update my own Mutt and discover that the patch no longer works, and I need to reverse the patch, look at the diff, and manually reapply it. Over time, I've just stopped patching altogether. > > > I'll try to take a look at mutt's code when I have some more time, > > > in a week or so. > > > > Ah, that'd be nice - somebody with the energy to fix some IMAP issues > > (hint: look at all the bugs involving IMAP). . . > > Hey, let's not jump into conclusions :) > > I'll take a look at the code, though, and see if there's anything I > can do. Once I'm sufficiently familiar with it, maybe I'll go through the > bug reports :) Hmm ... okay, that's all I can ask for, as long as I don't jump into the code myself ;-) Thanks, - Dave -- Uncle Cosmo, why do they call this a word processor? It's simple, Skyler. You've seen what food processors do to food, right? Please visit this link: http://rotter.net/israel
Attachment:
pgpvuzHGufSR8.pgp
Description: PGP signature