[nmh-workers] The State of exmh.

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
18 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[nmh-workers] The State of exmh.

Ralph Corderoy
Hi,

Where does one go for exmh these days?  Google's top hit is
http://exmh.sourceforge.net/ and that says the current web site is
http://www.beedub.com/exmh/.  There, `2.7.2 released January 7, 2004'
headlines and the tar file is beside it.

But Debian ships 2.8.0 on its stable version and in
https://sources.debian.org/src/exmh/1:2.8.0-7/debian/control/ says
`Homepage: http://www.exmh.org/', but that's a re-direct to
http://beedub.com where I can reach the `current web site' mentioned
above.

I considered poking around
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/exmh-users for signs of life,
but those archives are subscriber only.  I found a probable public copy
at https://marc.info/?l=exmh-users&r=1&w=2 and see valdis is active.

The 2.7.2 I found suggests running a wish script to install.  That
doesn't appeal without reading through and understanding it first.  :-)
Debian has a dozen patches to apply, and a semi-hand-crafted
/etc/exmh.conf to avoid running the install program.  I'm thinking of
following its
https://sources.debian.org/src/exmh/1:2.8.0-7/debian/rules/ to manually
install here on Arch Linux.

Advice welcome.

--
Cheers, Ralph.
https://plus.google.com/+RalphCorderoy

--
nmh-workers
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The State of exmh.

Tom Lane-2
Ralph Corderoy <[hidden email]> writes:
> Where does one go for exmh these days?

The last I heard on the topic was per attached.  It doesn't look like
there has been any activity in the sourceforge git tree since then, which
seems odd.  Anyway, the exmh-users list is definitely still active;
I got some traffic from it just a couple weeks ago.

                        regards, tom lane

------- Forwarded Message

Date:    Fri, 10 Nov 2017 00:01:35 -0500
From:    [hidden email]
To:      [hidden email], [hidden email]
Subject: GIT tree is now on sourceforge.

Finally beat 'git cvsimport' into submission, and when I did a read-only
'git clone', the lib/ directory was essentially the same as the CVS directory
I started from, so I can't have botched it *too* badly.  'git log' and
similar seem to reflect history properly.

So I'll just leave the top level pointer here:
https://sourceforge.net/projects/exmh/

See if you can find the git tree, clone it, etc.  Yell if there's a problem.
If I haven't heard anything in a few weeks, I'll go back and nuke the CVS
version.

_______________________________________________
Exmh-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/exmh-users

------- End of Forwarded Message

--
nmh-workers
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The State of exmh.

Ralph Corderoy
Hi Tom,

> The last I heard on the topic was per attached.

Ah, thanks.  I see 2.8.0 at
https://sourceforge.net/projects/exmh/files/exmh/

> valdis wrote:
> > Finally beat 'git cvsimport' into submission

That reminds me of Eric Raymond's reposurgeon that Bill Wohler used for
coverting the mh-e repo.
http://www.catb.org/~esr/reposurgeon/features.html

--
Cheers, Ralph.
https://plus.google.com/+RalphCorderoy

--
nmh-workers
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The State of exmh.

Alexander Zangerl-4
In reply to this post by Ralph Corderoy
On Tue, 06 Nov 2018 14:02:48 +0000, Ralph Corderoy writes:
>Where does one go for exmh these days?  Google's top hit is
>http://exmh.sourceforge.net/

and that's the right place for uptodate sources.

>and that says the current web site is
>http://www.beedub.com/exmh/.

i'll get in touch with brent welch about updating that version and link
on his site.

>I considered poking around
>https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/exmh-users for signs of life,
>but those archives are subscriber only.

exmh-workers and exmh-users are very low volume lists, but worth
subscribing to.

>I found a probable public copy
>at https://marc.info/?l=exmh-users&r=1&w=2 and see valdis is active.

and so am i (the debian maintainer of both exmh and nmh).

>The 2.7.2 I found suggests running a wish script to install.
>That doesn't appeal without reading through and understanding it first.  :-)

that's been the way exmh tunes and adjusts things before installation
for decades. it's not awesome.

>Debian has a dozen patches to apply, and a semi-hand-crafted
>/etc/exmh.conf to avoid running the install program.  I'm thinking of
>following its
>https://sources.debian.org/src/exmh/1:2.8.0-7/debian/rules/ to manually
>install here on Arch Linux.

the main reason why debian has debian-specific patches is that
the debian policy requires particular behaviours wrt. where files
may go and so on. some are just patches for things that have been fixed
in cvs/git since 2.8.0 went out.

regards
az


--
Alexander Zangerl + GPG Key 2FCCF66BB963BD5F + http://snafu.priv.at/
Happiness is the maximum agreement between reality and desire.
 -- Joseph Stalin

--
nmh-workers
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers

signature.asc (817 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The State of exmh.

Valdis Klētnieks
On Wed, 07 Nov 2018 08:21:46 +1000, Alexander Zangerl said:

> On Tue, 06 Nov 2018 14:02:48 +0000, Ralph Corderoy writes:
> >Where does one go for exmh these days?  Google's top hit is
> >http://exmh.sourceforge.net/
>
> and that's the right place for uptodate sources.

It needs some work though.  The project page at
is reasonably up to date (I think - yell if something is out of
date/wrong).

https://sourceforge.net/projects/exmh/

I'm tagging the current git tree as 2.9.0 and pushing
out the tarballs - everything since April 2012 has called
itself 2.8.0.

If I screwed the pooch and botched something, yell so I can
push a 2.9.1 out. :)

> >and that says the current web site is
> >http://www.beedub.com/exmh/.
>
> i'll get in touch with brent welch about updating that version and link
> on his site.

I can fix the link - the question is where to change it to....

Also, after I converted the tree to git, I missed the part where that
page points at now non-existent CVS snapshots.

> >I found a probable public copy
> >at https://marc.info/?l=exmh-users&r=1&w=2 and see valdis is active.

Yeah, I'm (mostly) alive.  Current not-yet-in-git projects are
fixing up the 'display html' support, and fixing up the multipart
composition support.

> the main reason why debian has debian-specific patches is that
> the debian policy requires particular behaviours wrt. where files
> may go and so on. some are just patches for things that have been fixed
> in cvs/git since 2.8.0 went out.

I *think* that the current git tree contains all the non-Debian-specific
patches.


--
nmh-workers
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers

attachment0 (497 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The State of exmh.

Ralph Corderoy
Hi valdis,

> I'm tagging the current git tree as 2.9.0 and pushing out the tarballs

Thanks, I now have

    $ b2sum exmh-2.9.0.tar.gz | cut -c-42
    a097b2e5c5cd44dd6d84e239bf6e674584e9eb4952

--
Cheers, Ralph.
https://plus.google.com/+RalphCorderoy

--
nmh-workers
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The State of exmh.

Ken Hornstein-2
In reply to this post by Ralph Corderoy
>I considered poking around
>https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/exmh-users for signs of life,
>but those archives are subscriber only.

You know, this has always driven me nuts.  Why is it set like this?  Can
that be opened up?

--Ken

--
nmh-workers
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The State of exmh.

nmh-workers mailing list

Den 07.11.2018 21:52, skrev Ken Hornstein:
>> I considered poking around
>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/exmh-users for signs of life,
>> but those archives are subscriber only.
> You know, this has always driven me nuts.  Why is it set like this?  Can
> that be opened up?
You could always subscribe. Below is last msg on [hidden email],
from today:

Den 07.11.2018 07:15, skrev [hidden email]:

> I tagged 2.9.0 and pushed it to the git repository and 2.9.0 tarballs to the
> sourceforge project page.  I *think* I caught most of the important 2.8.0->
> 2.9.0 references. If I missed anything, yell...
>
> In related questions:  Is it going to cause any issues if I make nmh 1.6 the
> minimum supported underlying MH release? I'm looking at taking a baseball bat
> to our current multipart composition support, but it would leverage mhbuild
> which first appeared in nmh 1.6.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Exmh-workers mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/exmh-workers

--
nmh-workers
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The State of exmh.

Ken Hornstein-2
>> You know, this has always driven me nuts.  Why is it set like this?  Can
>> that be opened up?
>You could always subscribe.

I am subscribed, but occasionally I want to look at the archives.  I am
not a member of any other list that is restricted to subscribers only.
Are you actually arguing this makes sense?

--Ken

--
nmh-workers
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The State of exmh.

Tom Lane-2
Ken Hornstein <[hidden email]> writes:
> I am subscribed, but occasionally I want to look at the archives.  I am
> not a member of any other list that is restricted to subscribers only.
> Are you actually arguing this makes sense?

FWIW, I am on quite a few other lists that restrict their archives
to subscribers.  It's not that insane a policy, though I agree it
doesn't really seem necessary for exmh-users.

If you want it changed, this is hardly the right list to be complaining
on.

                        regards, tom lane

--
nmh-workers
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The State of exmh.

Paul Fox-3
tom wrote:
 > Ken Hornstein <[hidden email]> writes:
 > > I am subscribed, but occasionally I want to look at the archives.  I am
 > > not a member of any other list that is restricted to subscribers only.
 > > Are you actually arguing this makes sense?
 >
 > FWIW, I am on quite a few other lists that restrict their archives
 > to subscribers.  It's not that insane a policy, though I agree it
 > doesn't really seem necessary for exmh-users.
 >
 > If you want it changed, this is hardly the right list to be complaining
 > on.

of course, once one is on the right list, then one has access to
the archives, making the whole conversation, in the eyes of those
defending the policy, moot.  hard to have a rational conversation
about the issue in that context.

it's a dumb policy.  makes me think the people on the exmh list have
something to hide.

paul
=----------------------
paul fox, [hidden email] (arlington, ma, where it's 46.8 degrees)


--
nmh-workers
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The State of exmh.

Ken Hornstein-2
>of course, once one is on the right list, then one has access to
>the archives, making the whole conversation, in the eyes of those
>defending the policy, moot.  hard to have a rational conversation
>about the issue in that context.

Even being on the list ... it's a pain.  Because to access the list
archives I have to remember my "list password", which is some randomly
generated string, which I never do so I always have to have it emailed
to me (I might be able to change it, but clearly it's stored in
plaintext because it always gets emailed back to me, so I don't want
to make it something I remember).  I mean, I don't get it ... why not
make them public?  I'm on a number of closed lists that require manual
approval to join, but the archives are still public.

--Ken

--
nmh-workers
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The State of exmh.

Ralph Corderoy
Hi Ken,

> Even being on the list ... it's a pain.  Because to access the list
> archives I have to remember my "list password"

Because there's so little value in the Mailman subscription password, I
let Firefox remember them.

> I mean, I don't get it ... why not make them public?  I'm on a number
> of closed lists that require manual approval to join, but the archives
> are still public.

Mailman doesn't allow archives that are both private and public
depending on date.  It could be exmh's list started private and thus
can't be made entirely public because posters historically thought their
prose was semi-private, e.g. Google doesn't see it.  A workaround is to
subscribe the list to a public archiver so Google can see everything
from the switch-over date onwards, as long as the list-info page makes
this clear as otherwise new posters still think it's semi-private.

That's what we had to do on the local Linux User Group Mailman list.
Some of us disliked it being private because it's a resource for Q&A
where we put effort into providing the A.  Others didn't want their old
stuff being exposed.

I think the `Mailing Lists About exmh' at http://beedub.com/exmh/ could
do with linking to public archives too, e.g. the marc one Google found.
Being able to see a list's traffic can be a good incentive to bother
subscribing, e.g. low volume, high signal.

--
Cheers, Ralph.
https://plus.google.com/+RalphCorderoy

--
nmh-workers
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The State of exmh.

Andy Bradford-2
In reply to this post by Ken Hornstein-2
Thus said Ken Hornstein on Wed, 07 Nov 2018 15:52:32 -0500:

> >I considered poking around
> >https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/exmh-users for signs of life,
> >but those archives are subscriber only.
>
> You know, this has always driven me nuts.  Why is it set like this?  Can
> that be opened up?

I prefer these anyway:

https://marc.info/?l=exmh-users&r=1&w=2
https://marc.info/?l=exmh-workers&r=1&w=2

Andy
--
TAI64 timestamp: 400000005be451bc



--
nmh-workers
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The State of exmh.

Andy Bradford-2
In reply to this post by Ralph Corderoy
Thus said Ralph Corderoy on Thu, 08 Nov 2018 10:36:12 +0000:

> A workaround is  to subscribe the list to a  public archiver so Google
> can see everything  from the switch-over date onwards, as  long as the
> list-info page makes  this clear as otherwise new  posters still think
> it's semi-private.

If you didn't see  my previous email... It was already  done long ago by
MARC; these archives go back to 1998:

https://marc.info/?l=exmh-users&r=1&w=2
https://marc.info/?l=exmh-workers&r=1&w=2

I  don't know  if they  are 100%  complete, but  I don't  know why  they
wouldn't be.

Andy
--
TAI64 timestamp: 400000005be4538c



--
nmh-workers
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The State of exmh.

Valdis Klētnieks
On 08 Nov 2018 08:16:55 -0700, "Andy Bradford" said:

> If you didn't see  my previous email... It was already  done long ago by
> MARC; these archives go back to 1998:
>
> https://marc.info/?l=exmh-users&r=1&w=2
> https://marc.info/?l=exmh-workers&r=1&w=2
>
> I  don't know  if they  are 100%  complete, but  I don't  know why  they
> wouldn't be.

Brent Welch put out the 1.b release in August 1993.  However, the chances
that anything from the first 5 years is still relevant to anybody besides
cyber-archaeologists is vanishingly close to zero...

--
nmh-workers
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers

attachment0 (497 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The State of exmh.

Ralph Corderoy
In reply to this post by Ralph Corderoy
Hi,

> Thanks, I now have
>
>     $ b2sum exmh-2.9.0.tar.gz | cut -c-42
>     a097b2e5c5cd44dd6d84e239bf6e674584e9eb4952

Reading through the notes, it appears metamail is pretty vital for
display of MIME messages.  (In particular, I was interested to see how
exmh handled text/html.)  metamail isn't packaged for Arch Linux, but
then that's probably not surprising as it also appears to have been
removed from Debian in 2009 due to being missing upstream.
https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/metamail

--
Cheers, Ralph.
https://plus.google.com/+RalphCorderoy

--
nmh-workers
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The State of exmh.

Alexander Zangerl-4
On Thu, 08 Nov 2018 17:53:28 +0000, Ralph Corderoy writes:
>Reading through the notes, it appears metamail is pretty vital for
>display of MIME messages.

it's not required anymore; i added support for recode instead
of metamail in commit 2bf11b0704 in 2008.

regards
az


--
Alexander Zangerl + GPG Key 2FCCF66BB963BD5F + http://snafu.priv.at/
Duct tape is like the force.  It has a light side, and a dark side, and
it holds the universe together... -- Carl Zwanzig

--
nmh-workers
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers

signature.asc (817 bytes) Download Attachment