Re: PINE Debian Package
On Wed, Apr 22, 1998 at 04:40:12PM -0700, George Bonser wrote:
> On Wed, 22 Apr 1998, Jason Costomiris wrote:
>
> > Weak? Uh, many of us feel that mutt is quite an order of magnitude
> > better. I am among those who feel this way. Why is mutt better?
Because it is faster. I still was able to read 30+ MB mailboxes (debian bug
reports ;) without struggle. Over 7000 messages, and after building and
sorting the index (which took half a minute on my pentium 100), I have
instant access to evry mail. And this with only 16 MB RAM.
Pine has a lot of problems with just 2-5 MB mail boxes, and most of my
mailboxes are around 7 MB most of the time.
Over telnet, Pine managed to hung every five minutes for a few minutes,
with the cursor at the "N" of the bottom menu line. This was also a
problem of the university net, but it was worse in pine then elsewhere.
> > 2) *much* more configurable than pine
>
> But is missing some key items.
It is actively under development. You should really give it a try and post
your experience to the author. This is a big plus. (it is free software,
too).
> Put another way. If you have to support a couple of hundred relative unix
> clueless, I would rather they use pine than mutt. I will admit that it
> has sveraql months since I last took a look at it, I am willing to have
> another look.
It has improved a lot. You should give it a try!
I'm not sure... personally I dislike Pine's interface, but that is a matter
of taste. They don't differ too much anyway.
BTW, George: You said nasty things on this list. You are free to change your
distribution, but please refrain from prejudices --- we actually try our
best to include every software available. But sometimes we are not allowed
to do so. Blame the upstream author for it (read: ask him politely to change
license). *We* can't change the license, and we will not change our policy
for pine or other non-free software.
If you dislike this, there are other distributions that can make commercial
agreements with upstream authors --- we are a voluntarily effort, and can
not do such agreements (instead, we request that other's must have the same
right as the Debian distribution. We don't like exceptions made for us, and
will not make use of them). This is to protect *your* right to distribute
the Debian distribution.
Disclaimer: I do not speak on behalve of the Debian project, but you can
find the official position in the dfsg, which I won't quote, but it contains
text that is aequivalent to what I said above.
--
"Rhubarb is no Egyptian god." Debian GNU/Linux finger brinkmd@
Marcus Brinkmann http://www.debian.org master.debian.org
Marcus.Brinkmann@ruhr-uni-bochum.de for public PGP Key
http://homepage.ruhr-uni-bochum.de/Marcus.Brinkmann/ PGP Key ID 36E7CD09
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: