Re: Rmail-mbox branch

[Paul Michael Reilly]

Stefan Monnier wrote:
> > In any case, to head off more branch and merge grief, right now I'm
> > considering taking an approach of doing a minimalist clone of the mbox
> > code to my CVS trunk based workspace and call it Pmail for lack of a
> > better name.  The goal is to allow me to work on both Rmail/babyl and
> > Rmail/mbox simultaneously.  It might seem like more work but I have a
> > strong hunch that being able to work on both versions side by side
> > will help increase the chance that this project will actually get
> > done.
>
> You mean you want to replace the branch by combining both features so
> they coexist in the same branch (e.g. in the trunk)?

Correct.  Once both Rmail/mbox and Rmail/bably are running in the trunk 
the branch is obsolete.

> That sounds like a good plan.  Even better if you can avoid duplicating
> files, using (if rmail-mbox <somecode> <othercode>) where
> necessary instead.

This type of approach may make it more difficult (but not impossible by 
any stretch) to have both running simultaneously.  I'll keep it in mind. 
The more I think about it the more appealing it is.

> As long as the BABYL code is not broken before the mbox code works, and
> as long as there is clear understanding that we *will* finish the mbox
> support, you could even install this code on the trunk so people can
> test it just by (setq rmail-mbox t).

Agreed.

-pmr