On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 11:35 AM, James Graham <jgra...@opera.com> wrote:
> > > On Tue, 29 May 2012, Ian Fette (イアンフェッティ) wrote: > > On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 10:53 AM, James Graham <jgra...@opera.com> wrote: >> >> You do realize that you're using a mail client that hasn't been updated >> in 4 years, is unmaintained, and never saw wide-spread deployment? >> > > I'm using a mail client that works exceptionally well for my use case, > with the exception of a few problems caused by a small number of senders. > Of these, many of the issues (e.g. top posting) are independent of the > client. > > > I realize that all software is "niche" at some point >> > > Technical mailing lists are niche at best and I am sure I am not the only > alpine user (I believe Hixie also uses it, for example). I am certainly not > the only user of mail clients other than your approved four. > > I also note that the archive software doesn't make your approved list and > indeed suffers from exactly the problem I describe [1]. > > [1] > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/**Public/www-archive/2012May/**0047.html<http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2012May/0047.html> W3.org doesn't even seem to be running an up-to-date version of hypermail. They're running 2.2, the current stable release is 2.3, which was released in 2009. This also appears unmaintained as best i can tell though, the development list shows no activity since 2010. Again, color me unsympathetic. http://www.hypermail-project.org/archive/
