Re:Why kernel development still uses email
by dredmorbius on Sunday October 02, 2016 @06:26AM
(#12621731)
If you're sending email, it's trivial to use, if all else fails, a shell tool or application-based email client. Standard unix mail, mailx, mutt, or various mail utilities within Perl, Python, Ruby, etc., can all be adapted to accept patches and some cover text with ease, largely noninteractively.
If you're actually reading email off LKML, that's another story.
But seriously: mutt, pine, Emacs mail mode, or even graphical clients such as Evolution or Kmail, will work just fine. And can be used in conjunction with nontechnical (there's another phrase I'm avoiding using here) GUI mainstream email clients used for other tasks.
If you can't figure out how to install and use mail / mailx / mutt with git, you probably shouldn't be submitting kernel patches. Which in this case is a useful filter.
If you're actually reading email off LKML, that's another story.
But seriously: mutt, pine, Emacs mail mode, or even graphical clients such as Evolution or Kmail, will work just fine. And can be used in conjunction with nontechnical (there's another phrase I'm avoiding using here) GUI mainstream email clients used for other tasks.
If you can't figure out how to install and use mail / mailx / mutt with git, you probably shouldn't be submitting kernel patches. Which in this case is a useful filter.