>This is a good point.  I wonder if Tobias' feature belongs in a future 
>release of nmh, where we'd have time to discuss things like the 
>fascinating question Earl brought up: what about IMAP?  I had a few 
>major questions and concerns in my own long reply.  There's a lot that 
>nmh needs to do to catch up with changes in the email world since MH was 
>created in the mid-20th century.

I think that IMAP is doable, if the work can be put into it.  I don't think
you're going to get _all_ of nmh's features, but scan/show/rmm/refile
should be relatively simple.

>It would be a *real* shame to break nmh's programmability, or some 
>feature that's useful but obscure, by not discussing and testing it 
>thoroughly.  Once people start to use a new feature, there'll be 
>resistance to backing out a poor implementation and (re-)doing it right. 
>  I'm not saying that Tobias would implement something poorly, just that 
>it's hard to get very new and fundamental changes right without lots of 
>thought and testing...
>
>Ken, is it too soon to start a development branch for nmh-2.0 (or 5.0 :)?

Heh, my feeling is put it all on the head, and if it's a real problem, we
can back it out on a release branch.

--Ken

Reply via email to