> you seem a tad optimistic about how people interact with lists. Merely judging a tree by its fruits. For everything I build with source, the mail-driven projects are high-quality, low-breaking-changes, build with few to no warnings, and are a pleasure to use. The forge-driven projects are the opposite of that. We read "The Tortoise and the Hare" to children because it is true.
JS On 26-01-12 16:25, Oswald Buddenhagen via Mutt-dev wrote: > On Mon, Jan 12, 2026 at 09:18:59AM -0500, Jason Stewart via Mutt-dev wrote: > > Getting the > > suggestions and complaints from others may reveal that one's original > > plan was either mistaken or incomplete, and points the way toward a > > better solution. > > > the same can happen in the issue itself. > > > The mailing list is an excellent filter. > > > that's what i said. only i didn't mean it in a good way. ;-) > > > With things like github, > > people subscribe to a pet peeve, and ignore everything else. That > > selects for people who are fixated on one thing, but do not give a shit > > about anything else--including other users. Someone who stays > > subscribed to the mailing list has to at least glance through all > > discussions--even ones regarding features they don't care about. That > > means a) they care enough to devote that much sustained attention to > > mutt, and b) they have some context for on-going development ( > > strengths, weaknesses, bugs, history, goals, etc). > > > you seem a tad optimistic about how people interact with lists. > > also, people who feel committed to a project on github/... will put the > entirety of it on watch, and thus have the same effect as being on the list. > > the difference is really what medium one prefers. the forges have the data > naturally compartmentalized, which tends to be a _good_ thing. > this degrades the mail inbox to a notification stream, while all the actual > communication happens on the forge. that might be a tad counter-productive > for a mail client project (that dog-fooding thingie), but other than that, > the response is only indicative of the age of the audience here. :-P
