[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Nmh-workers] What are and what should be the qualifications for a c

From: Peter Davis
Subject: Re: [Nmh-workers] What are and what should be the qualifications for a current nmh user
Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2014 12:21:33 -0500
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.22 (2013-10-16)

On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 11:32:59AM -0500, Mike O'Dell wrote:
> Don't shoot, Robert, but
> I think it's time MH took its turn in the refactory.

I like this thinking a lot. The biggest "selling" point of MH/nmh has been, in 
my opinion, the storage architecture, which allowed mail files to be 
manipulated by ordinary OS
commands, and allowed scripts to intermingle MH-specific commands with more 
common commands. This, in turn, made it possible to write front-ends like xmh 
and MH-E. I'd love to
extend this model by making MIME parts as manipulable as messages.

When I started writing my own Web-based front-end to an MH-based server, the 
working title was AFMP ... archive/folder/message/part. That seemed like the 
most useful way to
conceptualize the hierarchy of mail "things" that might interest a user.

I would, however, suggest forking off GOMH (good ole' MH) from MH++ if anyone 
going to try this at home.


Peter Davis
The Tech Curmudgeon

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]