Derek Martin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Being able to say, "Mutt can do that, if you write a script to do it, > and write a macro to invoke the script and..." does not constitute > support for a feature in Mutt.
Not sure why not. The particular script or hook in question is trivially simple -- it's not like it requires writing hundreds of lines of code or anything like that. Unix users commonly automate various tasks with a few lines of shellscript, and they don't complain that the task is therefore "not supported by my OS/shell". I would say this situation is analogous. > Mutt's claim is that it sucks less than all other mailers, which was > once true; but IMO with each new feature that other mailers implement > that Mutt does not, this becomes less and less the case, Actually, one of the things that makes mutt suck less than other MUAs is that it *doesn't* have additional hundreds of little-used "features" to cause bloat, bugs, user confusion, and UI complication for no real added benefit. As a related example, I'm still disappointed SMTP support got added. Charles -- ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Charles Cazabon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> GPL'ed software available at: http://pyropus.ca/software/ -----------------------------------------------------------------------
