Orphaning Sylpheed

[Michael Schwendt]

On Tue, 17 Mar 2009 13:17:09 -0600, Pete wrote:

> > On Mon, 2009-03-16 at 16:36 +0100, Christoph Wickert wrote:
> > > Am Samstag, den 14.03.2009, 19:40 +0100 schrieb Michael Schwendt:
> 
> > > > As I'd like to discontinue with packaging the Sylpheed E-Mail Client
> > > > for Fedora, I've dropped ownership, so somebody else may take over.
> > > 
> > > I use it and I need it for my LXDE Spin, so I'm going to co-maintain it
> > > together with Itamar.
> > 
> > Just out of interest - is there much reason to prefer Sylpheed over
> > Claws any more? Is it lighter on resources, for e.g.? Just curious,
> > really.

Claws Mail's main pkg requires a few more libraries, most notably:
  libcurl
  libdb-4.7
  libdbus-1, libdbus-glib-1
  libetpan
  libexpat
  libgcrypt
  libgpg-error
  libpisock (Sylpheed could be built with basic pilot-link features, too)
  libsasl2
  libstartup-notification
  GnuTLS instead of OpenSSL
  
> I switched to Claws because I wanted Xft2, and went back to Sylpheed
> just as soon as the mainline acquired Xft2. It crashes too much.
> If I wanted another bloated MUA with unchecked hunger for features,
> I would be using Evo.

Somebody has been stubborn enough to convince me of switching from
Sylpheed to Claws Mail for an extended evaluation period. So far I like
it. I've been told it used to be quite unstable indeed when it was still
called Sylpheed-claws, and as I remember, it has changed *a lot* since
it had started as a fork and development version of Sylpheed. I hope
all crashes you have run into have been reported in bugzilla. Sylpheed
has not been crash-free and problem-free either.