It would appear that the Mutt users are two wrapped up in coming up with new keybindings to make much useful progress with their software, eh? :-) Moreover, Mutt has been updated four times in the past two years, while Pine has had nine releases that brought it from 4.44 to 4.60 (with big changes at 4.5x & 4.6x) in the same span of time. If you're going to compare to Mutt, then be consistent: Mutt didn't even exist until the end of 1998.
The program had already reached 4.00 by 1998, and as of last month is on 4.60.
I have better things to do with my time than try to come up with a different set, ya know? :-)Īnd Pine 3.x is ancient history by now. Pine's keybindings - much of which is inherited from Emacs - are clear, well thought out & documented, and predictable. You mention Pine's lack of keybinding flexibility as if that's a bad thing, but really, why would that be a good thing? I don't want a mystery meat UI I want clear, consistent behavior and preferably would prefer to have good documentation for that behavior.
