1.1 --- a/discussion.roff	Tue Jul 10 22:28:10 2012 +0200
     1.2 +++ b/discussion.roff	Tue Jul 10 22:30:17 2012 +0200
     1.3 @@ -19,7 +19,7 @@
     1.4  MH once provided anything necessary for email handling.
     1.5  The community around nmh has the similar understanding that nmh should
     1.6  provide a complete email system.
     1.7 -In fundamental contrast, mmh shall be a MUA only.
     1.8 +In fundamental contrast, mmh shall be an MUA only.
     1.9  I believe that the development of all-in-one mail systems is obsolete.
    1.10  Today, email is too complex to be fully covered by a single project.
    1.11  Such a project will not be able to excel in all aspects.
    1.12 @@ -62,7 +62,7 @@
    1.13  .Id mail-transfer-facilities
    1.14  .P
    1.15  In contrast to nmh, which also provides mail submission and mail retrieval
    1.16 -agents, mmh is a MUA only.
    1.17 +agents, mmh is an MUA only.
    1.18  This general difference initiated the development of mmh.
    1.19  The removal of the mail transfer facilities was the first work task
    1.20  in the mmh project.
    1.21 @@ -138,7 +138,7 @@
    1.22  by reading them, one at a time, from the standard input.
    1.23  .P
    1.24  With the removal of the MSA and MRA, mmh converted from an all-in-one
    1.25 -mail system to being a MUA only.
    1.26 +mail system to being an MUA only.
    1.27  Now, of course, mmh depends on third-party software.
    1.28  An external MSA is required to transfer mail to the outside world;
    1.29  an external MRA is required to retrieve mail from remote machines.
    1.30 @@ -393,7 +393,7 @@
    1.31  .Pn slocal
    1.32  is an MDA and thus not directly MUA-related.
    1.33  It should be removed from mmh, because including it conflicts with
    1.34 -the idea that mmh is a MUA only.
    1.35 +the idea that mmh is an MUA only.
    1.36  .Pn slocal
    1.37  should rather become a separate project.
    1.38  However,