It’s not a question of benefit or downside, it’s just different. The CLI works well for quick actions and for scripting, but you can find it a bit annoying to use on daily basis. Aerc/mutt/alpine take more time to configure, and you can only use it from within the terminal frame (loop). I would say that the CLI is more low level, but also more versatile. For example you can build interfaces at the top of the CLI to get almost the same feeling as a TUI. See https://github.com/dantecatalfamo/himalaya-emacs or https://github.com/pimalaya/himalaya-vim.
Regarding HTML, not sure to understand the question. Reading HTML? Or writing? I would say it’s the same level as Aerc/mutt/alpine.
Timely, I was just writing on a builtin for Cat9 that’s using it. Bringup has been smooth thus far.
Thank you for your work!
Nice! Two questions:
It’s not a question of benefit or downside, it’s just different. The CLI works well for quick actions and for scripting, but you can find it a bit annoying to use on daily basis. Aerc/mutt/alpine take more time to configure, and you can only use it from within the terminal frame (loop). I would say that the CLI is more low level, but also more versatile. For example you can build interfaces at the top of the CLI to get almost the same feeling as a TUI. See https://github.com/dantecatalfamo/himalaya-emacs or https://github.com/pimalaya/himalaya-vim.
Regarding HTML, not sure to understand the question. Reading HTML? Or writing? I would say it’s the same level as Aerc/mutt/alpine.