[neomutt-devel] To fork or not to fork?
gui-gui at netcourrier.com
Fri Jan 27 22:28:58 CET 2017
On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 03:45:36AM +0000, Richard Russon wrote:
> > To fork or not to fork?
> That's always been the trickiest question.
> One that I've been doing my best to avoid answering.
> > Do we want to be just an extended mutt with many patches
> > applied but following [upstream mutt]
> No, not really. I foolishly hoped that supplying patches and being
> enthusiastic might kickstart development on Mutt. I was wrong.
> > Or shall Neomutt be something of its own
> Damned right, it should.
I'm pretty sure that answers the question. In the long run, we're going
to be a fork. But that doesn't mean we have to burn the bridges tonight.
> > refactoring means more changes - and probably breaking away from mutt.
> So far this hasn't been much of a problem. Mutt is moving slowly and a
> lot of the features are fairly self-contained.
> As we get more ambitious and refactor more widely, it'll become hard to
> merge upstream mutt's fixes.
> By that point we need enough manpower and momentum to continue on our own.
We should probably keep an eye on the bugfixes they do for as long as we
include some of their code. If only to add to our test suite (that I'm
sure we'll have one day ^^).
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 488 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the neomutt-devel