[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       mutt-dev
Subject:    Re: The future of mutt... - intermediate aggregation
From:       "jpacner () redhat ! com" <jpacner () redhat ! com>
Date:       2013-11-15 12:01:59
Message-ID: 52860D37.7090009 () redhat ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

Hi there,

> no, actually, i was referring to the first part of my first sentence in
> that paragraph. of course there is a time perspective to it, but that's
> not the point.

Oh, I see now. The survey is not essential - the proposals themselves
are needed (e.g. with proper arguments based on some publicly accessible
sort-of-survey, usually of small size and done by the proposer himself).

> i completely fail to understand what you mean

Rephrased: "You've entitled my suggestion. You didn't do anything
anything else."

> to remind you, the original context was caring about modern features.

Therefore I wrote *improve*/fix.

> i'm referring to the core community on this list - the (ex-)maintainers
> and occasional contributors. the observable behavior seems very
> traditional to me, and entirely consistent with esr's essay.

Mankind like patterns and we both are not an exception. You try to match
esr's essay with mutts core community but I don't. As I wrote earlier,
we need third source to discuss this so we can conclude what to
change/improve in the mutt project.

> yes. but i'm not sure what one has to do with the other.

Past is past, you can't change it. Don't look behind and go ahead with
clear mind and knowledge gained in the past. It means, don't use
patterns/attitudes which didn't work (the "dying" approach in case of
mutt) and create new ones, which have ambitions to change the current state.

Regards

-- Jan Pacner
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]