Hi,

On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 08:26:30PM -0700, Kevin J. McCarthy wrote:
> Hi Everyone,
> 
> I'm shortly going to send a set of patches to commit the neomutt version
> of the sidebar (with some fixes and cleanup).

Good news that vanilla mutt is gaining such a feature.
 
> The patch has quite a history, and is duly controversial.  Many people
> say they can't use Mutt without it, while others don't want it anywhere
> near their screen.  I can understand the latter group's feelings, so
> first let me note that Rich has made it a compile-time configurable
> option, defaulting off.

Okay, fine to make it compile-time configurable, but mutt should really
stop cluttering its source files with more #ifdef. The first patch adds
69 times "#ifdef USE_SIDEBAR" to various source files.

To work around that, #include "sidebar.h" should be made
unconditionnaly, and the header should either define prototypes or noop
functions depending on the value of USE_SIDEBAR. This way, the runtime
penalty is minimal for people who compile without the sidebar (we just
compute a few extra things or set some flags that are ignored), and it
makes the code way more friendly for people who want to make mutt
better.
 
> While I would like to commit the current set of patches now, I am not
> done with the changes I'd like to make before the next release.  There
> are still several things that are goofy with the patch, and I plan on
> fixing things over the next few weeks.  My current todo list is:

The serie is split in a strange way. Basically it's one feature patch
(that btw I can't apply to tip) and 7 fixups. Can't it be reorganized in
more logical commits? add new features to buffy, add new mailbox
operation to update buffy, add sidebar view, etc.

As Richard is involved in this thread, and that he can see what you're
aiming for, maybe he can help splitting this patch into reasonnable
chunks. That's just my two cents but as I said in another thread, the
fact that the patch cannot be sent on the list is a very good hint that
the patch is too big (and cannot be reviewed thoroughly).


Anyway, thanks to everyone working on integrating this feature!
-- 
Damien

Reply via email to