Do you think that the then taken conceptual decisions will be correct
forever? One thing I learned from, what you call the Linux way of
doing 'software development' is that later you'll always know better
and hence you should change. Nothing remains the same.
Note that I do not declare that I know better than you how to do
everything, but I think about change and how better concepts could
look like.
What I see happening in what I call the generalized Linux community
today is an infinite number of monkeys throwing spaghetti at the wall,
and absolutely everything that sticks geting shipped. As I alluded to
in an earlier message today, I suspect this comes from the perception
that 'my desktop is the universe' and therefore what works for me just
works. People don't grasp the consequences their changes will have on
others.
The one-person one-desktop metaphor is a fact of life, and somehow our
current models of software distribution will have to adapt to that.
But it ain't going to happen with MH ;-) So, despite a wickedly
interesting new research problem, the legacy of three+ decades of
in-place software that uses MH isn't going to go away. If there is to
be an nmh2 (horrible name, BTW), it should learn from MH and then
divorce itself from it in the same way that Plan 9 escaped from UNIX.
--lyndon
_______________________________________________
Nmh-workers mailing list
Nmh-workers(_at_)nongnu(_dot_)org
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers