On Thu, Dec 11, 2003 at 02:21:01PM +0100, Jens Paulus wrote: > On Thu, Dec 11, 2003 at 07:36:43 -0500, David Yitzchak Cohen wrote: > Hi folks, name's Dave :-) > > > but if you consider how much faster the computers get and how much the > > > available disk space gets bigger all within a short period of time I > > > think it is no problem if the programs get bigger. The computers get > > > faster more than the programs get slower. I would appreciate if my > > > preferred mail user agent was made the most powerful one if at the same > > > time the number of bugs does not increase meaningfully. > > > > You seem to be taking for granted that maintaining the most powerful mail > > user agent is just as easy as maintaining Mutt. We don't have Bill's > > cash to blow on ten zillion programmers; we need to keep Mutt small. > > but then there should at least be a complete list of available tested > and stable patches together with information where to get them and with > instructions for beginners on how to install them. There's a Wiki at wiki.mutt.org, and it lists an awful lot of patches. The most authoritative source for patches is the mutt-dev list, though. Sign up for it and tell procmail to /dev/null anything without the word patch in it. Over time, you'll accumulate tons of patches. - 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:
pgpqTWfM3XPz4.pgp
Description: PGP signature