I hope an amicable resolution can be worked out, but I really think
that the package should be called 'neomutt', and that the 'mutt'
package, if any, should be based on the upstream source, and should
more or less expect as people expect "mutt" to work. Or, if they want
to standardize on distributing neomutt only, at least have a package
redirection where installing "mutt" lists "neomutt" as the replacement.
I tend to agree with this. I don't know anything about it other than
what has been posted on this thread lately and don't have strong
personal feelings -- I use Debian on all my boxes including my laptop
but run neomutt from Github -- but I can sympathize with the upstream
author's point of view. I think there was a concern that moving the
Debian mutt package back closer to vanilla mutt or else changing the
name would impact existing users too greatly, but honestly it's a much
smaller deal than many of the shifts that have been made in Debian in
the past few releases and I think the suggestions from the previous
poster pretty much cover the bases.
Just my 2p.
Jeremy
--
Repartee is something we think of twenty-four hours too late.
-- Mark Twain
