On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 09:01:55AM -0400, Patrick Shanahan wrote: > * jpac...@redhat.com <jpac...@redhat.com> [09-30-13 07:29]: > > by this email I'd like to open discussion about the future of the mutt > > project. From year to year we can witness a small, but certain decline > > in the overall mutt project vitality. This is in direct contrast with > > the user-base which is (according to tickets and mailing lists) both > > quite active and interested. > > Considering mutt's maturity in it's *intended* design, improvements and/or > changes in direction greatly diminish one's expections of major changes > are not and cannot be seen which would give the impression of a loss of > "vitality".
This is nonsense. There have been many discussions on this list about possible improvements, covering a wide range of functional and UI areas. The 1.6 release is supposedly waiting on some of those... and has been for a very long time now. And THAT completely ignores the idea that Mutt's design is over 15 years old, and its design philosophy is much, much older. Mutt, and its user base (or at least a substantial segment of it), could certainly benefit from being brought into this century. > The "user-base" activity you cite would give one the opposite impression > of *vitality*. No it doesn't, not in the slightest. The OP was talking about the vitality of development, not the vitality of the user base. The project is all but dead. > You apparently are dissatisfied with some function or lack thereof. Why > not suggest changes or improvements you feel necessary rather than > possibly creating a schism. Because such discussions invariably go nowhere. This is precisely the problem. -- 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.
pgpUUzrjb8moE.pgp
Description: PGP signature
