On Thu, Jan 04, 2001 at 11:49:45 -0700, John Galt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [...] > Let's see: Pine Is Nearly (no-longer lately...) Elm, you say that mutt > actually derives from elm, yet they don't share code. Um, yeah, sure, > whatever. BTW from the LG article about mutt...
AFAICT mutt does not share code with pine.
[...]
> Presumably, the Mutt team at least looked at Pine's implementation if for
> no other reason than to see what to avoid.
initial versions of mutt used the c-client library, that pine is also based
on. but once michael elkins (at that time the sole author) realized that
a number of mutt's goals [0] could not be achived with c-client, that part
of mutt was rewritten. since c-client is gone, no code of pine that i know
of is in mutt. all that must have happened in early 1996.
now, features is a different discussion. when i proposed the variable
keybinding feature to michael, i think i got the idea from pine. or at least
i wanted to accomodate some of our pine l^Husers who would refuse mutt with
its default keybindings. but the code is certainly michael's, based on my
prototype.
[0] most notably the PGP/MIME support. c-client and/or IMAP does evil things
to those mime-parts.
--
Thomas 'Mike' Michlmayr | ignorami: n: The BOFH art of folding problem
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | lusers into representational shapes.
pgpGGc2uoUR9r.pgp
Description: PGP signature
