| 1 |
On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 06:58:57AM +0200, Nicolas Bock wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 09:11:19AM +0200, Nicolas Bock wrote: |
| 3 |
> >Hi, |
| 4 |
> > |
| 5 |
> >I would like to add neomutt to the tree. This new package is meant as |
| 6 |
> >an alternative and not a replacement of the existing mutt package. |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> Thanks for all of the great suggestions and feedback! |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> This is round two. I have update the ebuild with all your |
| 11 |
> suggestions. I have also added support for eselecting between mutt |
| 12 |
> and neomutt. Before the eselect ebuild can land though, we need to |
| 13 |
> rename the mutt binary so that the managed link can be called |
| 14 |
> mutt. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
I am against the eselect idea. If the binary upstream is neomutt, that |
| 17 |
is what we should call it, and we should not rename the mutt binary. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
William |
Archives