markus schnalke dixit (2009-10-06, 20:54): > > > Stuff like gpg, html2text (or text2html for those who wants to raise > > > hate on mailing lists), filters to format a mail into a 'reply' format > > > prefixing lines with '>' ... are just pre and post-hooks when calling > > > the $EDITOR or $PAGER. > > > > Isn't that what mh (nmh) and the surrounding ecosystem have been doing > > for the past 25 or so years? > > Yes. It's the MUA that fits best into the Unix system. > > Unfortunately, email is no longer like it was back then when MH was designed. > Hence, MIME was retro-fitted, GPG needs to be done by hand, and UTF-8 is not > supported at all. > > I switched to nmh just these days and I'm greatly impressed. It gives this > feeling that you know from using Unix. But you need to do a lot of stuff by > hand. (OTOH you can!)
/me envies somewhat. Been planning to take the plunge and switch over from mutt, but there's just too much in my config file that I depend on and won't have time of reworking in mh in foreseeable future. > It should definately be reworked. (At least to add UTF-8 support.) Agreed. > But back on topic: nmh is only a MUA that operates on local mail boxes. IMO > that's all it should be. The separation between the different mail clients > makes sense. Right. I also second the notion of (r)syncing mailboxes from a remote host somebody proposed. mh or other local MUAs fit well in such a scenario. > Mounting remote mail boxes into your local file system seems to be the right > thing. Then there is no local--remote difference. (This kind of thinking is > what I learned from Plan9.) That's another solution. However this would require a good filesystem with local caching and graceful disconnection handling. I think syncing over SSH is at the moment simpler and good enough. Best, -- [a]
