For interested readers
Kari E. Hurtta
I made combined patch Elm 2.4 PL25 -> Elm 2.4ME+ PL25 (25).
-r--r--r-- 2 hurtta nog 979162 Aug 20 22:17 elm-2.4ME+PL0-25.patch
Available in <URL:http://www.ozone.fmi.fi/KEH/elm-2.4ME+PL0-25.patch>
Only 33146 lines :-)
Kari E. Hurtta
In article <slrn51lva3...@banach.math.fu-berlin.de>
guc...@banach.math.fu-berlin.de (Sven Guckes) writes:
> hur...@ozone.FMI.FI (Kari E. Hurtta):
> > I made combined patch Elm 2.4 PL25 -> Elm 2.4ME+ PL25 (25). [...]
> > Only 33146 lines :-)
>
> 's ok - he's from Finland. ;-)
:-)
> What will happen to these patches when ELM2.5 gets out?
I don't know.
Sven Guckes
hur...@ozone.FMI.FI (Kari E. Hurtta):
> I made combined patch Elm 2.4 PL25 -> Elm 2.4ME+ PL25 (25). [...]
> Only 33146 lines :-)
's ok - he's from Finland. ;-)
What will happen to these patches when ELM2.5 gets out?
Sven [hey - joke!]
Bill Pemberton
In article <4vf6iv$1...@polaris.eurocontrol.fr>,
Ollivier Robert <Ollivie...@eurocontrol.fr> wrote:
>
>Do you think it will ever come out ? alpha11 is still pretty lacking in
>many areas, including MIME, PGP and such, just where Mutt and ELM-ME shine.
>
Yes, it'll come out.
It won't have PGP support until there is a clear standard for PGP encoded
messages.
Unless some one submits a patch, MIME support looks like it will stay the
way it is....
--
Bill
Sven Guckes
Ollivie...@eurocontrol.fr (Ollivier Robert):
> Do you think it will ever come out ? alpha11 is still pretty lacking in
> many areas, including MIME, PGP and such, just where Mutt and ELM-ME shine.
It will come out. Eventually. The development list shows a mail per day. :-)
I wish there was an overview of the current development issues - eg
a web page with info about bugs and fixes, development goals and the like.
All these things seem secret that I wonder whether any developer knows all.
I cannot get poeple to install ELM as it does not have autoconf support.
Everyone tells me that setting up ELM sucks (compared to other programs).
One of the main things that people want is support for PGP.
And this is something that will definitely NOT be in the next release.
I haven't given up hope for ELM yet as some of the features mentioned sound
very promising - eg the internal file browser and support for mailing lists.
But so far this newsgroup seems to go the same way as news.software.nn :
There is a development group - but they never give info to the newsgroup.
There are lots of people who use the program, love it, read the newgroup,
and who want to see the next version - but they don't get a beta to test.
And then there is a FAQ - but it does not get updated.
ELM is one of those programs that don't die as it is one of the best -
until someone comes along and makes it better.
It is a big chore - but it is well worth the trouble and time.
I wish I could tell everybody that ELM is about to go beta.
But judging from the info I have seen I don't expect a beta anytime soon.
Sven
Richard Coleman
wf...@virginia.edu (Bill Pemberton) writes:
> In article <4vf6iv$1...@polaris.eurocontrol.fr>,
> Ollivier Robert <Ollivie...@eurocontrol.fr> wrote:
> >
> >Do you think it will ever come out ? alpha11 is still pretty lacking in
> >many areas, including MIME, PGP and such, just where Mutt and ELM-ME shine.
> >
>
> Yes, it'll come out.
>
> It won't have PGP support until there is a clear standard for PGP encoded
> messages.
Since PGP/Mime (think that's the name) is on the standards track,
don't you think this would be the way to go? I believe some other
mail clients are already working on such support.
Also, any PGP support is better than none. If you wait until some
standard is cast in stone, you will get left behind.
> Unless some one submits a patch, MIME support looks like it will stay the
> way it is....
What is wrong with the MIME work that K.H. has done?
What will 2.5 have that will encourage people to upgrade, if it
doesn't have features contained in the ME/KH patches? I've installed
the latest version from K.H, and my users have come to really like
it. If 2.5 doesn't support features that people have become accustomed
to, many people will not upgrade.
Richard Coleman
col...@math.gatech.edu
Ollivier Robert
[courtesy cc of this posting sent to cited author via email]
In article <slrn51lva3...@banach.math.fu-berlin.de>,
Sven Guckes <guc...@math.fu-berlin.de> wrote:
> 's ok - he's from Finland. ;-)
> What will happen to these patches when ELM2.5 gets out?
Do you think it will ever come out ? alpha11 is still pretty lacking in
many areas, including MIME, PGP and such, just where Mutt and ELM-ME shine.
--
Ollivier ROBERT -=- Eurocontrol EEC/TIS -=- Ollivie...@eurocontrol.fr
Usenet Canal Historique
Ollivier Robert
[courtesy cc of this posting sent to cited author via email]
In article <slrn51mea9...@banach.math.fu-berlin.de>,
Sven Guckes <guc...@math.fu-berlin.de> wrote:
> I cannot get poeple to install ELM as it does not have autoconf support.
> Everyone tells me that setting up ELM sucks (compared to other programs).
MetaConfig is very cumbersome IMO. I know its powerful but I'd rather see
ELM use GNU autoconf.
> I haven't given up hope for ELM yet as some of the features mentioned sound
> very promising - eg the internal file browser and support for mailing lists.
Mutt has no internal file browser but completion makes it less needed.
> ELM is one of those programs that don't die as it is one of the best -
> until someone comes along and makes it better.
I agree.
Kari E. Hurtta
In article <rc686c2...@redwood.skiles.gatech.edu>
Richard Coleman <col...@math.gatech.edu> writes:
> wf...@virginia.edu (Bill Pemberton) writes:
> > In article <4vf6iv$1...@polaris.eurocontrol.fr>,
> > Ollivier Robert <Ollivie...@eurocontrol.fr> wrote:
> > >
> > >Do you think it will ever come out ? alpha11 is still pretty lacking in
> > >many areas, including MIME, PGP and such, just where Mutt and ELM-ME shine.
> > >
> >
> > Yes, it'll come out.
> >
> > It won't have PGP support until there is a clear standard for PGP encoded
> > messages.
>
> Since PGP/Mime (think that's the name) is on the standards track,
> don't you think this would be the way to go? I believe some other
> mail clients are already working on such support.
Yes, I know this. I haven't yet time to work with it.
> Also, any PGP support is better than none. If you wait until some
> standard is cast in stone, you will get left behind.
>
> > Unless some one submits a patch, MIME support looks like it will stay the
> > way it is....
>
> What is wrong with the MIME work that K.H. has done?
I need to do patch agaist 2.5 alpha first (by to way, where is it).
When I look that elm-2.4ME+PL0-25.patch, it looks quite hard job.
And prefer first add support for:
multipart/alternative
general support (hooks) for multipart/signed
and multipart/encrypted
> After that I can add PGP/Mime support
better handling of charset's (specially support
for conversions between charsets and/or
ISO 2022 handling).
more consistent parsing of headers between top level
headers and subheaders of mime's bodyparts.
Unfortunately this requires rewriting of
read_headers in src/newmbox.c
more constent support between top level mail and
mails inside of message/rfc822 -types.
Support for text/enriched
> that requires implementing builtin++ another
way (via src/state.c -routines).
Support for Mime when printing (well, it is now
supported via attachment (v -command)
menu).
Finally: I don't know when I have time for these :-(
[ Hmm. Looks that this is my wishlist :-) . ]
Rob Funk
In article <DwIF8...@murdoch.acc.virginia.edu>,
Bill Pemberton <wf...@virginia.edu> wrote:
>It won't have PGP support until there is a clear standard for PGP encoded
>messages.
There is one, the one defined by PGP itself.
They begin with -----BEGIN PGP (ENCRYPTED or SIGNED) MESSAGE----,
which PGP adds in. No other standard is necessary.
Forget the MIME type -- just send it as text/plain, since most
MIME-capable programs don't even try to display MIME types they don't
understand.
I modified ElmME+ so that it would not declare the application/pgp
type, since other people's mail programs (including Elm 2.4) were just
saving my signed messages to a file instead of displaying them.
>Unless some one submits a patch, MIME support looks like it will stay the
>way it is....
The ElmME+ patches make Elm handle MIME quite nicely.
This "[include text/plain quoted-printable]" stuff is for the birds.
--
=========== R o b F u n k ===========|===========> fu...@osu.edu <===========
"Why are you here? Snap out of it. |rf...@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu
Wake up. It's all illusions." |rf...@freenet.columbus.oh.us
"I LIKE THE MOVIE" -- Richard Bach |http://er4www.eng.ohio-state.edu/~funkr
Ollivier Robert
[courtesy cc of this posting sent to cited author via email]
In article <DwJFp...@news.muni.cz>,
Miroslav Ruda <ru...@erebor.ics.muni.cz> wrote:
> And I have yet another unsupported protokol: DSN (Delivery Status Notification).
> But that means run sendmail -bs (or coerce Eric Allman to make DSN command
> line option to sendmail :-() .
That one is easy.
Sendmail 8.8 will have the "-N <dsn-value>" flag just for that purpose.
Miroslav Ruda
In article <dpivabc...@ozone.fmi.fi>, hur...@ozone.FMI.FI (Kari E. Hurtta)
writes:
|>
|> And prefer first add support for:
|>
|> multipart/alternative
|>
|> general support (hooks) for multipart/signed
|> and multipart/encrypted
|>
|> > After that I can add PGP/Mime support
|>
|> better handling of charset's (specially support
|> for conversions between charsets and/or
|> ISO 2022 handling).
|>
|> more consistent parsing of headers between top level
|> headers and subheaders of mime's bodyparts.
|> Unfortunately this requires rewriting of
|> read_headers in src/newmbox.c
|>
|> more constent support between top level mail and
|> mails inside of message/rfc822 -types.
|>
|> Support for text/enriched
|>
|> > that requires implementing builtin++ another
|> way (via src/state.c -routines).
|>
|> Support for Mime when printing (well, it is now
|> supported via attachment (v -command)
|> menu).
|>
|> Finally: I don't know when I have time for these :-(
|>
|> [ Hmm. Looks that this is my wishlist :-) . ]
Not only your wishlist :-(
And I have yet another unsupported protokol: DSN (Delivery Status Notification).
But that means run sendmail -bs (or coerce Eric Allman to make DSN command
line option to sendmail :-() .
--
Mirek Ruda
Billy Barron
guc...@banach.math.fu-berlin.de (Sven Guckes) writes:
>But so far this newsgroup seems to go the same way as news.software.nn :
>There is a development group - but they never give info to the newsgroup.
>There are lots of people who use the program, love it, read the newgroup,
>and who want to see the next version - but they don't get a beta to test.
>And then there is a FAQ - but it does not get updated.
>
You haven't been watching the NN group lately. There are new versions
and development is active. The key developer reads and posts to
the group on a regular basis.
I wish the same could happen with Elm. Elm is failing behind. I use
PINE when dealing with attachments because Elm is so bad at it.
--
Billy Barron bi...@utdallas.edu
New Technology Specialist
University of Texas at Dallas URL:http://www.utdallas.edu/
Bill Pemberton
In article <4vht7i$o...@charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu>,
Rob Funk <rf...@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> wrote:
>In article <DwIF8...@murdoch.acc.virginia.edu>,
>Bill Pemberton <wf...@virginia.edu> wrote:
>>It won't have PGP support until there is a clear standard for PGP encoded
>>messages.
>
>There is one, the one defined by PGP itself.
>They begin with -----BEGIN PGP (ENCRYPTED or SIGNED) MESSAGE----,
>which PGP adds in. No other standard is necessary.
>
In that case, no code changes are required from elm at all. The mailpgp and
morepgp perl scripts will deal with just fine.
>
>>Unless some one submits a patch, MIME support looks like it will stay the
>>way it is....
>
>The ElmME+ patches make Elm handle MIME quite nicely.
>This "[include text/plain quoted-printable]" stuff is for the birds.
>
2.5 has attachments. It's not the same as ElmME+, but it doesn't require
the include syntax.
--
Bill
Sven Guckes
bi...@frog.utdallas.edu (Billy Barron):
> >But so far this newsgroup seems to go the same way as news.software.nn :
> >There is a development group - but they never give info to the newsgroup.
> There are new versions and development is active.
> The key developer reads and posts to the group on a regular basis.
Yes, I think I should really resubscribe to this group and read it. ;-)
> I wish the same could happen with Elm. Elm is failing behind.
> I use PINE when dealing with attachments because Elm is so bad at it.
ELM is alive - behind the scenes.
But when it finally goes beta then people will be using Pine 4.0 or Mutt 1.0
and they will look at ELM and ask "when will ELM has this feature?"...
Sven
--
Sven Guckes guc...@math.fu-berlin.de
NN Pages: http://www.math.fu-berlin.de/~guckes/nn/ - latest release [960820]:
NN ftp://ftp.isca.uiowa.edu/unix/newsreaders/nn-6.5.0.tar.gz
NN sources maintainer: Michael T Pins mtp...@isca.uiowa.edu
Bill Pemberton
In article <rc686c2...@redwood.skiles.gatech.edu>,
Richard Coleman <col...@math.gatech.edu> wrote:
>
>Since PGP/Mime (think that's the name) is on the standards track,
>don't you think this would be the way to go? I believe some other
>mail clients are already working on such support.
>
The only standard I recall seeing was a draft that was later withdrawn.
>Also, any PGP support is better than none. If you wait until some
>standard is cast in stone, you will get left behind.
>
That's not true from a support standpoint. Once you you some sort of PGP
support your stuck supporting even if a better (or more standard) one comes
along.
>> Unless some one submits a patch, MIME support looks like it will stay the
>> way it is....
>
>What is wrong with the MIME work that K.H. has done?
>
I've not seen a patch for 2.5....
I did get a patch for the early ME stuff but was concerned with portability
and stability. Since that time the elm sources have diverged enough from
2.4 that it's not an easy task to patches developed for 2.4.
>What will 2.5 have that will encourage people to upgrade, if it
>doesn't have features contained in the ME/KH patches? I've installed
>the latest version from K.H, and my users have come to really like
>it. If 2.5 doesn't support features that people have become accustomed
>to, many people will not upgrade.
>
It'll have a different feature set then 2.4. If people don't upgrade, they
don't upgrade... In my opinion that is like saying "what is there to make
diehard mush users convert?" Nothing, diehard mush users will stay mush
users. The KH patches are, for all practical purposes, a different mail
reader.
--
Bill
Sven Guckes
wf...@virginia.edu (Bill Pemberton):
[pgp standard]
> >There is one, the one defined by PGP itself.
> >They begin with -----BEGIN PGP (ENCRYPTED or SIGNED) MESSAGE----,
> >which PGP adds in. No other standard is necessary.
> In that case, no code changes are required from elm at all.
> The mailpgp and morepgp perl scripts will deal with just fine.
... but ELM will still not show mails that are signed, encrypted, or both.
It will not keep your passphrase in mind and forget it five minutes later.
etc etc
> >The ElmME+ patches make Elm handle MIME quite nicely.
> >This "[include text/plain quoted-printable]" stuff is for the birds.
> 2.5 has attachments.
> It's not the same as ElmME+, but it doesn't require the include syntax.
How about giving this info in the FAQ?
Or does it have to remain a secret until it mysteriously appears? ;-)
Sven
--
Sven Guckes guc...@math.fu-berlin.de
Ceterum censeo - the ELM FAQ has to be updated!
Sven Guckes
wf...@virginia.edu (Bill Pemberton):
> >Also, any PGP support is better than none.
> >If you wait until some standard is cast in stone, you will get left behind.
> support your stuck supporting even if a better (or more standard) one comes
> along.
What else is new? What kind of standard are you waiting for?
How long will you wait for a standard to "establish" before you accept it?
Does it have to be standard that will not change within the next 100 years?
Like I said before: Just do it - the standard will follow.
People might want changes - but this is nothing you can prevent, can you?
> >What is wrong with the MIME work that K.H. has done?
> I've not seen a patch for 2.5....
I think he is trying to get his hands on an alpha to see if he can work in the
changes. But I think he would rather do this for a beta version. (hint hint)
> The KH patches are, for all practical purposes, a different mail reader.
And as soon as he will give it a completely new name people will convert to it.
Sven [hugh!]
Syd Weinstein
wf...@virginia.edu (Bill Pemberton) writes:
>>What will 2.5 have that will encourage people to upgrade, if it
>>doesn't have features contained in the ME/KH patches? I've installed
>>the latest version from K.H, and my users have come to really like
>>it. If 2.5 doesn't support features that people have become accustomed
>>to, many people will not upgrade.
>>
>It'll have a different feature set then 2.4. If people don't upgrade, they
>don't upgrade... In my opinion that is like saying "what is there to make
>diehard mush users convert?" Nothing, diehard mush users will stay mush
>users. The KH patches are, for all practical purposes, a different mail
>reader.
As the long time holder of the Elm mantle, I was coordinator and chief
leader of the Elm development effort for about 8 years), I really don't
understand peoples ego's in mailer versions. Elm-ME is not the first
offshoot of Elm. For those with short histories, Pine -> Pine Is
Nolonger Elm. Pine was developed, with the blessing of the Elm
Development Group, using the Elm sources as an offshoot of Elm. Now,
Pine is its own mailer, and eventually Elm-ME will do the same.
Elm is a product that fits a certain bill, and those that like the
niche it fits work on it. Those that complain, but don't work on it
get listened to, but at a much lower level, as after all, we don't
get paid for taking this abuse.
KH has time and desire to develop his own mailer. He didn't have the
desire to make it as portable and to the 'standards' that we had, and
thats fine. The first Pine versions were also non portable and lacking
in some of the features we had at the time. I see nothing wrong with
that. KH has taken Elm-ME a long way since then. If he wants to
integrate his changes back into Elm 2.5 fine, if not fine, thats his
business. There is room out there for both kinds of mailers.
>--
>Bill
--
Sydney S. Weinstein, CDP, CCP Former Elm Coordinator - Current 2.4PL25
Myxa Corporation Current Elm Coordinator: e...@myxa.com
s...@Myxa.COM or dsinc!syd Voice: (215) 947-9900, FAX: (215) 938-0235
Welcome Page: http://www.myxa.com Elm WWW: http://www.myxa.com/elm.html
Michael Elkins
In article <DwLC...@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU>, Bill Pemberton wrote:
>>Since PGP/Mime (think that's the name) is on the standards track,
>>don't you think this would be the way to go? I believe some other
>>mail clients are already working on such support.
>>
>
>The only standard I recall seeing was a draft that was later withdrawn.
draft-elkins-pem-pgp-04.txt (aka PGP/MIME) is available from ds.internic.net.
This draft has been accepted by the IETF as a Proposed Standard. An RFC
should be out soon, as it has already been sent to the RFC editor.
I don't see how ELM will support it in it's current state, unless it depends
on metamail. ELM-ME+ will definitely be able to have integrated support,
because of it's MIME handling. Pine should also support this in the future
(the developers showed up at the IMC conference in February, so I assume
they are interested).
Also, Eudora 3.0 (win95) will eventually have a plugin which supports
PGP/MIME.
So, unless a future version of ELM supports integrated MIME, it will be left
behind.
--
Michael Elkins <m...@cs.hmc.edu> http://www.cs.hmc.edu/~me
PGP key fingerprint = EB B1 68 32 3F B5 54 F9 6C AF 4E 94 5A EB 90 EC