[GTALUG] mutt (was: 2 weeks on cell ...)

[Lennart Sorensen]

On Mon, Jul 18, 2016 at 10:51:34PM -0400, Loui Chang via talk wrote:
> mutt generally follows keybindings similar to vim, less, and the like.
> If you don't like those then config keybindings to what your 'standard' liking.
> The ability to configure and customize is part of the power of mutt.

Cursor keys to move, enter to select, q to quit and go back.  Seems pretty
obvious.

> > weird display (aka "not 3-pane"),
> 
> You can get that, or closer to that with different build/config. Sidebar patch
> was recently mainlined. That interface would be weird in mutt anyways, at least
> not really necessary.

Not very nice for keyboard navigation.

> Folders/mailboxes are one key away. I can't read two or three things at once so
> I don't need to see email contents, plus list of emails, plus list of folders
> simultaneously.

Well I use screen to keep one mutt instance per folder going, so that's
convinient.  main email in screen 0, tlug in screen 1, lkml in screen 2,
netdev in screen 3, etc, spam in screen 9 or something like that.

> There is none unless someone has a patch kicking around somewhere. I think most
> needs can be met through a decent terminal editor and appropriate config. The
> idea of efficient email writing/reading is keeping your hands on the keyboard
> anyways.

Yes email involves content, which involves writing, which involves
keyboard, which does NOT involve mouse.

> ??? There is a wiki and a bunch of documentation.
> 
> Start here and read all the pages:
> https://dev.mutt.org/trac/wiki/MuttWiki

Yes the documentation is quite good.

> Sorry, try again. mutt requires something of a conceptual shift of how to deal
> with email. If you expect or rely on the 'traditional' method, then maybe mutt
> is not for you. mutt might only really appeal to people who dig into
> documentation, patches, and building software from source code.

Well some of us like traditional email, which mutt very much is.  Outlook,
gmail, thunderbird, etc are NOT traditional.

-- 
Len Sorensen