Re: Removing offlineimap?

[Greg Troxel <gdt%lexort.com@localhost>]

Thomas Klausner <wiz%gatalith.at@localhost> writes:

> On Mon, Jun 22, 2026 at 07:18:56AM +0100, Greg Troxel wrote:
>> Why did you import offlineimap3 instead of just updating offlineimap?
>> We generally only have multiple versions when there is a good reason,
>> and if it's expected that users can generally just update, then not
>> having multiple versions is better.
>
> I was under the impression that offlineimap3 is a separate
> project. Many distributions have packaged it under that name (with the
> '3'), see https://repology.org/project/offlineimap/versions

huh.  that's surprising, but many are just calling it offlineimap.

What doesn't make sense is that upstream is installing bin/offlineimap,
not bin/offlineimap3.

How about filing a bug with offlineimap3 and offlineimap that their
maintenance strategy is unclear and could they update their README
files.  They are suffering from github disease where the README doesn't
say the main things that someone intending to choose whether to build
the source and then build it needs to know.

Either that or just conclude their repo name is odd and should be
ignored :-)

> I'm fine with just replacing offlineimap with this. I'll wait for more
> feedback.

Thanks, and sure see what everybody else thinks.