1 |
Hi all, |
2 |
|
3 |
mail-client/muttng currently sits in the tree as some sort of orphan. |
4 |
It used to be a fork of Mutt, having many patches applied, features |
5 |
added and code cleaned up. However, at a certain point the project |
6 |
died, one of the main developers went back to Mutt and applied his |
7 |
patches there. Currently most of these patches are applied in Mutt's |
8 |
sources, or patches have been made to work with Mutt. Some have even |
9 |
improved a lot (e.g. SMTP support is native in Mutt, while it uses |
10 |
libesmtp in muttng). |
11 |
|
12 |
Current state of muttng is a bit vague. It tries to be a collection of |
13 |
patches against the latest development version of Mutt. However, since |
14 |
the latest svn release of muttng, I have never updated the package, as I |
15 |
don't really know what can or should be released from it. The result is |
16 |
IMO bitrot, and bugs/security holes are not fixed. Additionally, Mutt |
17 |
seems to have superceeded muttng by now. |
18 |
|
19 |
For this reason I would like to drop muttng from the tree (in a normal |
20 |
procedure, of course). I know at least one Gentoo (Security) dev seems |
21 |
to use muttng instead of mutt currently. If someone knows how life for |
22 |
muttng should continue, feel free to take over the package. If you are |
23 |
using muttng now, consider moving to the latest Mutt. |
24 |
|
25 |
Please speak up now if there are major reasons to keep muttng in the |
26 |
tree, despite being unmaintained and out of date. |
27 |
|
28 |
-- |
29 |
Fabian Groffen |
30 |
|
31 |
-- |
32 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |