Re: [Nmh-workers] mhn

[David Levine]

kre wrote:

> The one argument for keeping mhn in 1.7 is that it allows nmh 1.7 to
> be released soon, without needing to depend upon an updated exmh being
> released first

Another argument is that it is good practice to remove a program early
in the release cycle rather than at the end.  While we "know" that removing
mhn won't break nmh itself, we should live with it first.

And it allows us to properly advise users that after 18 years, it's really
going to happen.

There's no harm in keeping it for one more release.

David