mail/{neo,}mutt: why not packaged with gpgme?

[Derek Schrock]

On Sat, Nov 05, 2016 at 07:14:52AM EDT, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 02, 2016 at 09:45:51PM +0100, Niklaas Baudet von Gersdorff wrote:
> > Hello,
> > 
> > While talking about an issue I have with mail/{neo,}mutt and
> > security/gnupg on #gnupg on freenode I was advised to use
> > security/gpgme with mutt. I haven't been using gpgme for a while,
> > mainly because the packaged versions of both mail/{neo,}mutt have
> > it disabled and I was too lazy to compile it on my own. Since
> > I got that advice, I've started wondering:
> > 
> > Why is gpgme disabled by default?
> > 
> > As was argued (and as I experienced myself) setting up mutt to
> > work with gpgme is much easier than without. Especially gnupg2
> > made it difficult to configure mutt without gpgme. So why not
> > enabling gpgme in the packaged versions?
> > 
> > I decided not to create a PR about this request. If that's wrong,
> > tell me and I'll create one.
> > 
> >     Niklaas
> 
> Actually having tested it, yes you are right it is way more simple, I have
> activated it in neomutt
> 
> Best regards,
> Bapt

I can't find any reason why it was off in mail/mutt, maybe because it
was always off since 2006.  However, since this appears to be a
non-disruptive change, excluding some extra packages being installed, I
think it should be turned on for mail/mutt as well.  Can this be updated
without a PR/patch?