> […] virtually all of the people who use mutt either as their only > email client or along with others, chose mutt because of its > simplicity.
People who want a simple text mail client will use Alpine or similar. Mutt's possibly the most “complicated” text MUA. I don't use mutt because of its “simplicity”, I use it because of its power and flexibility. And I'm closely following this thread because I'm one of the “strange” people who'd _like_ mutt to be able to handle outgoing multipart messages; I was trying to achieve exactly that, three years ago: https://www.mail-archive.com/mutt-users@mutt.org/msg50518.html > It seems to be contrary to the direction and purpose of mutt to make > it do everything anybody wants. The current number of configuration options suggests otherwise, and mutt would lose most of its appeal for me if it trimmed down the number of options. > The harm of making the app more complicated and adding a lot of code > is real, and it directly affects the user of mutt whether he's new or > old. There are dozens of mutt options I turn off, yet I won't argue they need to be removed just because they're not part of _my_ use case. I can appreciate everyone's needs are different and what works best for me will likely not work best for everyone. -- · Patrice Levesque · http://ptaff.ca/ · mutt.wa...@ptaff.ca --
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
