Re: [arch-general] Mutt Compile-time Configuration

[Hunter Connelly via arch-general]

On Sat, Aug 20, 2016 at 12:52:36AM -0400, Jude DaShiell wrote:
> talkingarch users who haven't got g.u.i. running may have problems with that
> sidebar due to graphical character output from that feature messing up their
> screen readers.  There could be other or additional reasons I know nothing
> about yet too.

As OP said, the sidebar would not be turned on until it is configured in the
muttrc. Compiling the sidebar in would not affect current users of the
non-sidebar mutt package.

Re: [arch-general] Mutt Compile-time Configuration

[Jude DaShiell]

talkingarch users who haven't got g.u.i. running may have problems with 
that sidebar due to graphical character output from that feature messing 
up their screen readers.  There could be other or additional reasons I 
know nothing about yet too.


On Fri, 19 Aug 2016, Dutch Ingraham wrote:


Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2016 19:09:06
From: Dutch Ingraham <s...@gmx.us>
Reply-To: General Discussion about Arch Linux <arch-general@archlinux.org>
To: arch-general@archlinux.org
Subject: [arch-general] Mutt Compile-time Configuration

Hello all:

Mutt 1.7.0 was just released.[1] One new feature is the sidebar, which
up to now required a patched version of mutt from the AUR.  However, it is a
compile-time option and it appears as though the Arch packager has decided
to not enable it (my muttrc will throw an error if I try and configure
the sidebar.)

Can someone more familiar than myself explain why a packager would
decide to do this?  In other words, what are the general considerations
for including certain options at compile-time?  (In this particular
case, the sidebar would not be turned on until configured in the muttrc,
so compiling the option into the package would not affect those who do
not want it.)

Thanks for your replies.


[1]https://marc.info/?l=mutt-users=147154326009383



--

Re: [arch-general] Mutt Compile-time Configuration

[Jason Ryan via arch-general]

On 20/08/16 at 02:09am, Thibaut Marty wrote:

On Sat, Aug 20, 2016 at 01:39:28AM +0200, Bruno Pagani wrote:

I think that the packager just didn’t see this addition and only bounced the 
pkgver. There is an open ticket about this: 
https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/50445.


This would be surprising, as the new compile-time option was explicitly
given in the release announce mail. Does that mean the packager did not
subscribe to the very low-traffic mutt announce list or did not read it
before updating the package?
However, the UPDATING file does not mention the new option.


Or maybe they read it and just figured that anyone who wanted it would build it
themselves…

In any event, vesath has already pushed a version with it included.

/J

--

http://jasonwryan.com/
GPG: 7817 E3FF 578E EEE1 9F64 D40C 445E 52EA B1BD 4E40



signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: [arch-general] Mutt Compile-time Configuration

[Thibaut Marty]

On Sat, Aug 20, 2016 at 01:39:28AM +0200, Bruno Pagani wrote:
> I think that the packager just didn’t see this addition and only bounced the 
> pkgver. There is an open ticket about this: 
> https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/50445.

This would be surprising, as the new compile-time option was explicitly
given in the release announce mail. Does that mean the packager did not
subscribe to the very low-traffic mutt announce list or did not read it
before updating the package?
However, the UPDATING file does not mention the new option.

-- 
Thibaut


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: [arch-general] Mutt Compile-time Configuration

[Bruno Pagani]

Le 20 août 2016 01:09:06 GMT+02:00, Dutch Ingraham  a écrit :
>Hello all:
>
>Mutt 1.7.0 was just released.[1] One new feature is the sidebar, which
>up to now required a patched version of mutt from the AUR.  However, it
>is a 
>compile-time option and it appears as though the Arch packager has
>decided 
>to not enable it (my muttrc will throw an error if I try and configure 
>the sidebar.)

I think that the packager just didn’t see this addition and only bounced the 
pkgver. There is an open ticket about this: 
https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/50445.

>Can someone more familiar than myself explain why a packager would
>decide to do this?  In other words, what are the general considerations
>for including certain options at compile-time?  (In this particular
>case, the sidebar would not be turned on until configured in the
>muttrc,
>so compiling the option into the package would not affect those who do 
>not want it.)

It depends on a lot of things I think. Overhead of the option (in terms of 
dependencies especially, but also size, etc.), likelyhood of being use by a 
majority of users, whether it’s upstream default/recommandation…

But in this particular case, like I said, I think that the packager just didn’t 
see that there was this new option, and since it’s not on by default…

So just upvote the ticket if it’s not yours, and wait for the packager to react 
there. ;)

Bruno