What are the unacceptable differences between mutt and neomutt? I had been using aerc (written in golang). As a mutt copy, the design was decent, but the implementation was shit. Then I switched to thunderbird, trading bugs for mozilla hostilities. Then mutt. The lack of bullshit more than made up for the lack of features. The point of my old man story being that having one's mail client in "maintenance-only mode" can be a feature, rather than a bug. So THANK YOU Kevin for the time that you have put into this.
If the future is to have my bots message your bots, perhaps the next move is not mutt to neomutt, but mutt to pens and stationery? On 26-01-04 21:33, Kurt Hackenberg wrote: > On Sun, Jan 04, 2026 at 11:59:52AM +0800, Kevin J. McCarthy wrote: > > > No, sorry it's highly unlikely. Mutt has been in maintenance mode for > > the past 4 years. At this point my time is very limited, so I handle > > security issues or occasionally tiny fixes or improvements. But not > > large changes like this anymore. > > > > You might want to head over to the NeoMutt project and see what they think. > > If this continues, eventually Mutt will die. That's what happens to software > when development ends. > > I don't want that. Mutt is a programmer's mail reader -- powerful, flexible, > configurable -- and done at high quality. I'm not satisfied with NeoMutt as > a successor. Anyway, if Mutt dies, NeoMutt will probably die sometime later. > > Kevin is trying to step down from being the maintainer. Nobody has > volunteered to take over his job as it is, understandably. He seems to have > done it mostly by himself, and that's a lot of work. > > I think we need a different organization, one that distributes the > responsibility and work, and the control of the code, among more people. > Maybe there could be a team of 5-10 people that takes responsibility for > Mutt, with contributions from many other people, who might join the core > team someday. Part of the job would be ongoing encouragement and help for > contributors. > > Ideas?
