I like mutt, but aerc [0] is imho much better. But no matter which solution you prefer, editing emails in the terminal is so much more efficient. If the majority would switch to pure text emails instead of HTML...
Re:New way to have complex discussions
by dredmorbius on Tuesday May 07, 2024 @02:44AM
(#40283027)
Missing a link?
Sorry!
And some additional sources:
https://www.dennisc.net/writing/tech/gmail-aerc
https://www.julioloayzam.com/guides/email-with-aerc/
My simple config and binds that are a little bit more "vim-like":
Re:New way to have complex discussions
by dredmorbius on Wednesday May 08, 2024 @03:21PM
(#40301893)
Thanks!
Re:New way to have complex discussions
by steve_rambo on Tuesday May 07, 2024 @06:22AM
(#40283999)
aerc sometimes breaks on non-compliant email because the author of the header parser refuses to introduce kludges to handle broken email. When it happens, the mail in question simply doesn't show up in the list. I fully understand that position, but it's not really ideal as a user who can't simply refuse to deal with broken crap. So after using it for a couple of months I reverted to neomutt.
Text: Mutt, Alpine, and emacs's mailer off the top of my head. There's a listing of other clients here: <https://www.tecmint.com/best-commandline-email-clients-for-l...>
GUI: Sylpheed, Thunderbird, KMail (KDE's Kontact suite still strikes me as one of the best I've encountered), Evolution, and Clawsmail.
My own strong preference remains mutt, and the ability to process huge amounts of complex email reasonably well is still utterly unmatched.