* Steve Lamb [Wed, 6 Aug 2003 at 10:19 -0700] > > New mutt users might be slightly confused by the mutt way of doing > > things but that doesn't mean we have to patch mutt for their sakes. > > Naturally, it's up to the package maintainer how to differ from > > upstream, but this mutt user would be miffed. > > Why? It would in no way alter how you do things. It would alter the way my mail is sent. I expect mutt to use my MTA, whatever that is. And if I have to be conscious of the patch being installed and manually enter an smtp host in the configuration, (although it certainly could be localhost) then it does indeed change the way I do things and add a configuration step when I set up a new system. -- Hans Fugal | De gustibus non disputandum est. http://hans.fugal.net/ | Debian, vim, mutt, ruby, text, gpg http://gdmxml.fugal.net/ | WindowMaker, gaim, UTF-8, RISC, JS Bach --------------------------------------------------------------------- GnuPG Fingerprint: 6940 87C5 6610 567F 1E95 CB5E FC98 E8CD E0AA D460
Attachment:
pgpZBTFczzvRj.pgp
Description: PGP signature