Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 23 Oct 2011 17:11:05 -0400 (EDT)
From:      "Sean C. Farley" <scf@FreeBSD.org>
To:        Doug Barton <dougb@FreeBSD.org>
Cc:        Marco Beishuizen <mbeis@xs4all.nl>, freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org, Ted Hatfield <ted@io-tx.com>
Subject:   Re: Alpine mail client discontinued?
Message-ID:  <alpine.BSF.2.02.1110231705550.3100@thor.farley.org>
In-Reply-To: <4E9B9863.6090106@FreeBSD.org>
References:  <alpine.BSF.2.00.1110170021070.82407@yokozuna.lan> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1110161741360.58537@io-tx.com> <4E9B9863.6090106@FreeBSD.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, 16 Oct 2011, Doug Barton wrote:

> On 10/16/2011 15:49, Ted Hatfield wrote:
>>
>> A quick google search shows
>>
>> re-alpine
>>
>> http://sourceforge.net/projects/re-alpine/develop
>> http://re-alpine.sourceforge.net/
>>
>> The continuation of the Alpine email client from University of 
>> Washington.
>>
>> Maybe you would like to create a port.
>
> My read of the differences between the existing Alpine port and the last
> released version of re-alpine is that it's not worth disrupting the
> currently stable port. If anyone feels differently, just let me know.

For me, I have not noticed any difference, but I may not have been 
hitting any code that has changed significantly.  I think the existing 
port could easily use re-alpine's source without much change.  The 
binary is still alpine.

Of course, this could (should?) wait until 9 is out the door.

Sean
-- 
scf@FreeBSD.org



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?alpine.BSF.2.02.1110231705550.3100>