On Sat, Sep 23, 2000 at 10:19:17AM -0400, David T-G wrote: > ... and my fear is that, once such a change were made, the text-only > mutt would suffer if not go away entirely. That would really suck > for me, for instance, since I do my mail over an ssh vt100 > connection (and pround of it! :-) Not necessarily. Most of the functionality could be implemented in a common backend, and the frontends where just "stupid" displays... I do (believe it or not) use mutt over ssh, and wouldn't want to start using X11-forwarding just to read mail... > Could what you suggest be accomplished or approximated through a few > macros here and there combined with multiple term windows running mutt > under a windowing system? Most likely. But that still wouldn't let people to render bidirectional text or make tagging any easier. -Jens
- Re: catchup command? Byrial Jensen
- Re: catchup command? David Champion
- Re: catchup command? Jens Askengren
- Re: catchup command? Peter Jaques
- A better mutt? (Was Re: catchup command?) Jens Askengren
- Re: A better mutt? (Was Re: catchup co... Mikko Hänninen
- Re: A better mutt? (Was Re: catchu... Jens Askengren
- Re: A better mutt? (Was Re: c... Mikko Hänninen
- Re: A better mutt? (Was R... Chris Green
- Re: A better mutt? (Was Re: catchup co... David T-G
- Re: A better mutt? (Was Re: catchu... Jens Askengren
- Re: A better mutt? (Was Re: c... Rob Reid
- Re: A better mutt? (Was Re: catchup co... David Champion
- Re: A better mutt? (Was Re: catchu... Lukasz Stelmach
- Re: A better mutt? (Was Re: c... Suresh Ramasubramanian
- Re: A better mutt? (Was R... Lukasz Stelmach
- Re: A better mutt? (Was Re: c... Chris Green
- Re: A better mutt? (Was Re: catchup co... Wouter Verheijen
- Re: A better mutt? (Was Re: catchu... Chris Green