* Marc Wilson <msw@cox.net> [050829 06:52]:
> Depends on whether you consider elm or elm-ME to be real elm, I suppose.
> In less than a minute of Google-ing, I found freshmeat.net's page for
> elm-ME with a release date of 14 July 2005, and the actual elm homepage
> with a release in 2004.
>
> Debian *was* packaging elm-ME... I'm not quite sure when it was dropped,
> but it was still in the archive in 2002.
Taking a look at http://ftp-master.debian.org/removals.txt, I found the
following:
=========================================================================
[Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2004 11:24:27 -0500] [ftpmaster: James Troup]
Removed the following packages from unstable:
elm-me+ | 2.4pl25ME+100-2 | source, alpha, arm, hppa, hurd-i386, i386, ia64, m68k, mips, mipsel, powerpc, s390, sparc
Closed bugs: 141971
------------------- Reason -------------------
RoQA; orphaned for almost 2 years, quite inactive upsteam, other MUAs (e.g. mutt) provide more functionality
----------------------------------------------
=========================================================================
Is that what you are talking about? I never used elm myself, and I am
confused by elm / elm-me / elm-me+.
If you think it's worth the efford and the elm-me{+} development is
active again, than go ahead, fill an RFP or do the
work yourself.
Yours sincerely,
Alexander
--
http://learn.to/quote/
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature