On Jan 31, Michael Elkins [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote: > Jeremy Blosser wrote: > > SLRN. Much of Mutt's user interface was based on SLRN originally. > > <http://slrn.sourceforge.net/> > > This is not exactly true. The interface for Mutt was most influenced by > MUSH (Mail User's SHell) and ELM. I didn't start using SLRN until quite > some time after I started Mutt (was using trn at the time). The note on > the web page says that <at present it most closely resembles slrn>. > That's why it's not a surprise that lots of Mutt users use SLRN to read > news.
Oops. Mea culpa. On Feb 01, Charles Jie [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote: > Great! Thank you all. > > And I need some further suggestions: > > * Which is better for me to start? Using slrn or using the patch for mutt? > > * After a long time, which would be more probable for my working mode? > mutt + slrn, or mutt + patches? (ie ultimate mode of using mail/news) It depends on how you operate, probably. Do you see news as just another kind of mail, and you want to operate on it exactly like you operate on your mail? If so, using the patches will let you have all your accustomed mutt mail functionality (hooks, commands, etc.) available regardless of the medium. If you see news and mail as different things, and would prefer a client that is very good at mail for your mail, and one that is very good at news for your news, you probably will prefer mutt + slrn. (Some of the patches may well make mutt have both very good mail features and very good news features, I don't know... I don't personally prefer to operate that way, I'd rather use different tools for differing tasks.)
msg24033/pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
