Hi,
* Steve Lamb wrote (2004-02-08 11:29):
>Thorsten Haude wrote:
>>Nope, you could also use a *good* MDA instead of Procmail. Which shows
>>why the modular Unix approach is much more powerful than any catch-all
>>application.
>
> You're presuming 2 things.
>
>1: The person has access to install a decent MDA on said machine.
>2: The person has access at ALL to configure said MDA in the first place.
I assume that there is a MDA installed yes. That is not so far-fetched
as you seem to think. The MDAs I know can also be configured by the
user without access to global configuration file.
I don't understand the problem you pose. Of course I don't use an MDA
at work on the Windows box, where I have to use Outlook once in a
while. But we are not discussing Windows or any other static OS here,
we are discussing Debian.
> Also you, and others, seem to be presuming a third thing which simply
> is not true.
>
>3: Having internal filtering does not preclude using external filtering.
I assume no such thing, I just don't see the reason to use internal
filters if external filters do all I need.
> I'm all for the modular approach. However I do not nor ever will
>subscribe to the theory that an email client has absolutely no business
>bringing in, filtering, sending out and maintaining the data which is its
>primary function. I see all of those as part and parcel of a decent client
>and any client which does not incoporate those basic functions is
>deficient. Because without those basic functions one is locked into a
>single path of doing things which is contrary to the Unix way.
So Mutt is inflexible because you are *forced* to use a highly
flexible approach? That doesn't make sense to me.
Mutt is certainly not for everyone, but that is only because the setup
requires more work, not because you are restricted in any way.
Thorsten
--
Man will occasionally stumble over the truth, but most
of the time he will pick himself up and continue on.
- Winston Churchill
Attachment:
pgpIvNFNfr3W9.pgp
Description: PGP signature