>Why? nmh doesn't need any new features, and the code is stable and >portable. > >The best indicator that a chunk of code is mature is when it hasn't been >touched for five years. It ain't broke, so leave it alone.
Uuuhhh ... yeah, okay. That is certainly ONE possible interpretation. Another possible (and much more likely) interpretation: no one uses nmh very much anymore, so no one cares about fixing/improving it. I don't know about you, but when I go to look at a software package and I see the last new release was 5 years ago, my first thought isn't, "Oh, it's perfect! That's why they stopped developing it!"; it's "Oh, I guess that project is dead". And in case you haven't been paying attention, we just had a user who needed a feature which was just added within the last year. Here are some obvious things people have asked about, repeatedly. - TLS support - IMAP support (I am not interested in arguing about whether or not this is a good idea, "breaks the MH model", or other such nonsense - the undeniable truth is that there are people who are interested in it). Here are some pie-in-the-sky things I would like: - Some sort of embeddedable language support for components files (I am partial to Tcl, but I don't have a strong preference). Why? Because I'd like to use different headers (like a different "from" line) for different mailing lists, and having an embeddable language that would be called to write component files would be really useful for that. - Better handling for MIME parts when doing replies. For example, telling "repl" just to take the text part when replying to multipart message. --Ken _______________________________________________ Nmh-workers mailing list Nmh-workers@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers