[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: OT: why I don't want CCs



Hi!

[Finally I must join this thread now.]

On Sat Jul 19, 2003 at 01:05:32AM -0400, Bijan Soleymani wrote:
> This argument just doesn't make it. Mutt does filtering (shouldn't

Where does mutt filter you messages? With what setting?

> procmail be doing this). Mutt does IMAP and POP (shouldn't fetchmail

ad IMAP: A MUA has to support IMAP or IMAP would be another POP. IMAP
mails belongs on the server side and not on the client.

ad POP: Do you have a desktop and a notebook and only have POP available
on your ISP's server? How do you manage to have all mails at your
machine without messing with some scripts? The POP support makes sense
because you can treat a POP server just like a mailbox.

> and offlineimap do this). Mutt does encryption (ok so it probably runs
> gnupg in the background but still this means you can't use GENERICpg
> because it might not use exactly the same options). With all of those
> things you have an option of running an external program or using the

Not true. mutt does pgp, gpg and S/MIME via openssl. It only calls some
binaries, no builtins. If you have NoPG or whatever you can manage to
setup mutt to use it even with some very uncommon command line option.
Just read the rc files in the /usr/share/doc/mutt/examples/ directory.

> built-in support of mutt. Sadly for me, I use external programs
> (fetchmail, procmail, spamassassin, and so on) for getting mail, but I
> would like mutt to handle just sending the mail. But for some reason
> only that part of the chain is taboo.

Sending mail belongs to the MTA aka Mail Transfer Agent.

> I also find it weird that Evolution is a kitchen sink (Microsoft
> Outlook) type email client, but it support local mbox and maildir,
> external gpg, external spamassassin, internal and external filtering,
> and sending through local MTA or through smtp smarthost. However I
> don't think it supports an external editor, although it might.

File a wishlist bug report.

> Pine comes with pico, but you can use vim instead. Mutt supports IMAP
> and POP but you can use external apps as well. Evolution can use SMTP
> smarthost or local MTA. In each of these cases the advanced user can
> choose to ignore the built-in functionality.

And you could ignore to use mutt if you don't want to mess with a MTA.
BTW, ever tried to run eximconfig with option 2? You can setup a
smarthost using mailserver within 9.3 seconds (if you are fast ;-).

> One reason why I do is choice. That's why I don't like software that
> says: "You can't do X this way", even though *I* want to do it that
> way.

Again file wishlist bug reports against these packages. Or don't use
"these types of software".

When everybody else likes the way X does its tasks why should upstream
or the package maintainer change the way X does its tasks? It makes
actually sense to split software in several parts or you will end up in 
software that does everything (german speaking people would say
eierlegende Wollmilchsau) and nothing because the software developer has
to reinvent all type of software from scratch (or use some fine
libraries) and doesn't have time to hack some new features in.

Just my 2 eurocents.

So long
Thomas

-- 
 .''`.  Obviously we do not want to leave zombies around. - W. R. Stevens
: :'  : Thomas Krennwallner <djmaecki at ull dot at>
`. `'`  1024D/67A1DA7B 9484 D99D 2E1E 4E02 5446  DAD9 FF58 4E59 67A1 DA7B
  `-    http://bigfish.ull.at/~djmaecki/

Attachment: pgpza7du_HFym.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: