tmux(1) in base

[Anonymous]

Ed Schouten <ed at 80386.nl> writes:

> Hi all,
>
> At the DevSummit in Cambridge we briefly discussed including tmux(1) in
> the base system. We recently had window(1) there, but unfortunately
> window(1) was a very limited tool, compared to tools like screen(1) and
> tmux(1). Why tmux(1) and not screen(1)? Well, simple. The first has a
> better license and very active maintenance.

I think some simple tool like dtach(1) but with BSD-friendly license
would be better suited for base system. And unlike mg(1) which is
preferable to have in /rescue I don't think there is a reason to have
tmux(1) in base other than avoiding ports.