Seems like a lot of energy going into nonproductive arguing here. A few thoughts, in no particular order.
I want to keep using the mailing list; wiki's are nice for some things, but not ongoing discussions. I hate having to reread all sorts of stuff in wikis to find the new stuff, and I like a linear history of things. I think that some work needs to be done on cleanup before any major changes are made. In particular, the library stuff needs to be scrubbed, and I notice that Josh is doing some of that. I think that this is important so that the foundation doesn't keep shifting as new stuff is built on top. I hope to find some time to do some work there soon. (Any opinions on using mmap? Would make all of the header processing much simpler to just mmap the first few k of each message and then run pointers through it.) I use mh because it's one of the few things left that still pretty much follows the unix philosophy that I learned as a teenaged summer student at BTL in the early 70's. I like having a set of commands that each do one thing so it's easy to add new commands that do new things. I like the one-message-per-file structure which makes it easy to apply the rest of the unix toolset to mail. I would like any major changes to mh to follow the original non-monolithic, one message per file philosophy. I'd like to avoid changing mh into something as complex as most of the monolithic packages that are out there today. In general, I don't see much point to the currently discussion which seems to be escalating towards a flame war. If you want to do something, lay out a proposal, let's toss it around, and then get to work. Jon _______________________________________________ Nmh-workers mailing list Nmh-workers@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers