Re: removing mutt patches

From: Felix Palmen <>
Date: Fri, 05 May 2023 18:19:42 UTC
* Derek Schrock <> [20230504 18:33]:
> However, given that some of the patches are part of neomutt I think that
> if you need these features you can either install that or build locally
> with local patches or better yet work with upstream to include to
> directly to mutt.
> I've always wanted to drop all patches since I don't use any of the
> features so in turn don't have a good means to test however I've kept
> them in for legacy reasons.

Disclaimer, NeoMutt user here (former user of Mutt with "random"
patches). IMHO: go ahead and drop them. FreeBSD ports deliver "vanilla"
upstream software whenever possible.

The situation with Mutt seems to be a bit special, because even many
years ago, there were a *lot* of patches floating around that upstream
didn't include. Whether there was just a lack of resources or there was
some reason to reject them, I don't know, but IMHO, that's not

The important thing is, these patches added valuable features, but
that's exactly where NeoMutt took the stage as a fork including many of
these features. Before that happened, there was some justification to
offer feature patches as a distributor. But, IMHO, nowadays, there isn't
any more. And in case some feature is missing in NeoMutt, putting a
feature request there is probably more promising.

So, again IMHO, let's stick to the "only patch ustream when really
needed to fix something" policy with Mutt as well.

Cheers, Felix

 Felix Palmen <>     {private}
 -- ports committer (mentee) --            {web}
 {pgp public key}
 {pgp fingerprint} 6936 13D5 5BBF 4837 B212  3ACC 54AD E006 9879 F231