Elias Mårtenson <[email protected]> writes: > Indeed. It not only seems extreme, it _is_ extreme. > However, in certain industries this is pretty much > required. The alternative is to run Outlook or > Evolution or some other email application that can > handle it.
Another alternative is not to be a banker :) Besides now that you nox'd your profession and assumed income you have to contribute monetarily to the GNU movement, or else... :) > Like it or not, this is how people work in these > industries and if you're able to avoid it, great. > That means that you are lucky enough to not need > what I built. I certainly wish that I didn't have to > use it myself, but it's either that or not use Gnus. > I choose the latter. ... That said, compared to the > amount of time I would have wasted having had to use > a different email client, it's definitely worth it. Yes, in principle it is a good approach. I say "in principle" because sometimes it isn't possible to bridge that gap satisfactorily. You get a half-baked result which can be even more frustrating. Say that Outlook is 50% the way you want it. Adapted Gnus is 80% the way you want it. When you use the 80% you are constantly reminded of those lacking 20%, and in your mind they start to grooo000w. Soon you are at 50% again, only this time you are aware of your failure as well which makes it 40% or 30%. But if you bridged the gap 95%-100% then your efforts are well spent - congratulations. -- underground experts united http://user.it.uu.se/~embe8573 _______________________________________________ info-gnus-english mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/info-gnus-english
