Re: What am I missing without mutt?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On 02/05/08 22:27, s. keeling wrote:
> Dotan Cohen <email@example.com>:
>> On 05/02/2008, BartlebyScrivener <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>>> On Feb 4, 5:20 pm, "Steve Lamb" <g...@dmiyu.org> wrote:
>>> > It all depends on the work habits of the individual user.
>>> Well, you can say that about anything, right? The OP asked what he was
>>> missing, so he's soliciting the opinions of people with different work
>> Exactly. I asked because I'm certain that there are those with more
>> experience and more efficient workflows than myself. So I ask.
> I come from the dark ages. For me, it's important that the tools I
> use write files that anything can deal with, not just the app which
> created them. Mutt handles any standard form of mail box format,
> including on_some_other_server(don't much care how), aka. imap.
> The guis, in my experience, save in their own format (If you let them?
That's just not true.
Well, ok, it's *partially* true: Outlook stores mail in a
proprietary indexed format.
But Netscape and it's descendants all use mbox as the native format,
as does Evolution & KMail. Sylpheed uses mh, which is also a
standardized text format.
The only non-standard bit about these mailers is the directory where
they decide to store these mbox files.
Ron Johnson, Jr.
Jefferson LA USA
PETA - People Eating Tasty Animals
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----