New application proposal - git-core SCM

Gary R. Van Sickle
Wed Nov 2 05:05:00 GMT 2005

> From: Tim O'Callaghan
> > I don't know about the others but I don't think we want to have two 
> > competing versions of mutt in the distribution.  I don't 
> see mutt-ng 
> > in any linux distro either so it would need to be voted on anyway.
> > 
> This is the kind of information that should possibly be added 
> to the setup.html? While i do not see that multiple tools 
> doing the same job is a bad thing, i can see why it might not 
> right for cygwin. Same is true of the pre-requisite of having 
> it in a Linux distro.

The "pre-requisite" is only a sort of "fast track" for new package approval
- if it's in Debian the app gets a free pass as far whether it gets to be
included or not.

Otherwise, it needs an up or down vote from maintainers.  There's like
primaries and gerrymandering and such, it gets pretty messy, there's a page
somewhere with the details I'm sure. ;-)

> With regards to mutt, I emailed g.r.vansickle about 3 weeks 
> ago asking about the possibility of moving from mutt 1.4.1 to 
> 1.5.10 or to create a 1.5.10 test release. I did not get any 
> response, so i grabbed and compiled the latest mutt and later 
> found mutt-ng.

Oh, yeah, sorry.  For future reference, private emails are generally
discouraged in favor of posts to the lists.  Somebody asked me this on-list
not long ago; My current plans are to only support the "Stable" 1.4.x
upstream release.

As far as doing 1.5.x as a "test" release, it seems to me that would be a
bit of a misuse of the test category.  The way I see it, "test" is purgatory
for "curr"-wannabes.  There's a lot of upstream mutt development going on
right now, and there's no indication that 1.5.10 will ever be stamped
"Stable" (in fact I'd be pretty surprised if it was).

>  I do not want to step on any toes or usurp 
> anyones maintainership. I just thought a wider audience might 
> like easy access to mutt-ng, as i use it with the other tools 
> i mentioned.
> The advantages of mutt-ng is that it can handle getting 
> messages via POP, IMAP and NNTP without need for an external 
> tool. It also has a thunder-bird style sidebar in which you 
> can display the status of your mail and news folders.

I frankly don't know much about mutt-ng other than what you said there and
that it's a fork of the mutt codebase.  Rumor on the mutt lists is that it
isn't very active, and I got the impression it was a fork that had "flamed

I personally don't care one way or the other if you wanted to package it,
unless it would interfere with mutt or its mailbox(es).  Is mutt-ng still
using mbox and/or Maildir?

Gary R. Van Sickle

More information about the Cygwin-apps mailing list