--- a/ch01.roff	Sat May 19 17:26:15 2012 +0200
+++ b/ch01.roff	Sat May 19 17:57:20 2012 +0200
@@ -153,66 +153,70 @@
 
 .H1 "nmh: Code and Community
 .P
-In order to understand the state, goals and dynamics of a project,
-one needs to know its history. MH predates the Internet,
-it comes from times before networking was universal,
-times when emailing was small, short and simple.
+In order to understand the condition, goals and dynamics of a project,
+one needs to know the reasons.
+MH predates the Internet, it comes from times before networking was universal,
+it comes from times when emailing was small, short and simple.
 Then it grew, spread and adopted to the changes email went through.
-The core-concepts, however, remained the same.
-During the 80s a small group of students at the University of
-California, actively worked on MH. They added features and optimized,
-like it is common for scientific work. This is still in pre-ANSI C
-times. The source code contains many ancient parts. Code constructs
-specific to BSD or hardware of that time are usual.
+Its core-concepts, however, remained the same.
+During the Eighties students at UCI actively worked on MH.
+They added new features and optimized the code for the then popular systems.
+All this still was in times before POSIX and ANSI C.
+As large parts of the code stem from this time, today's nmh source code
+still contains many ancient parts.
+BSD-specific code and constructs taylored for hardware of that time
+are frequent.
 .P
-Nmh started eight years after the ANSI C standard had been
-established. A more modern coding style entered the code base. Still
-a part of the developers come from ``the old days''. The developer
-base became more diverse and thus the code had different style.
-Programming practices
-from different decades merged into the project. Different coding
-styles came together. It appears as if multiple peers added code
-parts, resulting in a conclomeration rather than a homogenic
-of-one-cast mail system. Still, the basic concepts hold it together.
+Nmh started about a decade after the POSIX and ANSI C standards had been
+established. A more modern coding style entered the code base, but still
+a part of the developers came from ``the old days''. The developer
+base became more diverse and thus resulted in code of different style.
+Programming practices from different decades merged in the project.
+As several peers added code, the system became more a conclomeration
+of single tools rather than a homogenic of-one-cast mail system.
+Still, the existing basic concepts held it together.
 They were mostly untouched throughout the years.
 .P
-Although, at the surface, nmh is a toolchest, meaning a collection
-of completely modularized small programs, on the source code level,
-it is much more interweaved. Parts of the basic functions are
-collected in a MH standard library, which is good, but often
-separate functions are compiled into programs, for effiency reasons.
+Despite the toolchest approach at the surface \(en a collection
+of separate small programs \(en on the source code level
+it is much more interweaved.
+Several separate components were compiled into one program
+for effiency reasons.
 This lead to intricate innards.
-The advent of MIME rose the complexity of email by a magnitude. This
-is visible in nmh. The MIME-related parts are the most complex ones.
-It's also visible that MIME support had been added on top of the
-old MH later. The MH style made this easily possible, but it
-also lead to duplicated functions (e.g. \fLshow\fP, \fLmhshow\fP)
-and had not been thoroughly included into the concepts (e.g. the
-user-visible access to whole messages and MIME parts are inherently
-different).
+Unfortunately, the clear separation on the outside appeared as being
+pretty interweaved inside.
 .P
-For backward-compatibility's sake, it is a common understanding to have the
-default settings to be compatible, requiring any new feature to be
-explicitely enabled.
+The advent of MIME rose the complexity of email by a magnitude.
+This is visible in nmh. The MIME-related parts are the most complex ones.
+It's also visible that MIME support had been added on top of the old MH core.
+MH's toolchest style made this easily possible and encourages
+such approaches, but unfortunately, it lead to duplicated functions
+and half-hearted implementation of the concepts.
+.P
+To provide backward-compatibility, it is a common understanding to not
+change the default settings.
 In consequence, the user needs to activate modern features explicitely
 to be able to use them.
-This puts a burden on new users, because nmh
-out-of-the-box keeps staying in the same ancient style, where users
-usually want to have it practical for modern emailing.
-But of course, this depends if nmh is seen to be a front-end or a
-back-end.
+This puts a burden on new users, because out-of-the-box nmh remains
+in the same ancient style.
+If nmh is seen to be a back-end, then this compatibility surely is important.
+However, in the same go, new users have difficulties to use nmh for modern
+emailing.
+The small but matured community around nmh hardly needs much change
+as they have their convenient setups since decades.
 
 
 .H1 "mmh
 .P
-I started to work on my experimental version in Fall 2011.
+I started to work on my experimental version in October 2011,
+when there were no more than three commits to nmh in the previous nine months..
 In December, when I announced my work on the nmh-workers mailing list,
 .[
 nmh-workers mmh announce december
 .]
-the activity in nmh rose heavily.
+the activity in nmh rose much.
 Suddently the community started to move.
-This movement was pushed much by Paul Vixie's ``edginess'' message.
+This movement was heavily pushed by Paul Vixie's ``edginess'' comment.
 .[
 nmh-workers vixie edginess
 .]
@@ -225,7 +229,7 @@
 (My login name is \fImeillo\fP.)
 The project follows my personal considerations and preferences.
 By calling it a personal project, I don't need to justify my decisions,
-though, still I do.
+though, still I like to do.
 This enabled me to follow my vision staightly and thus produce
 a result of greater pureness.
 This project model was inspired by the window manager \fIdwm\fP,
@@ -233,20 +237,20 @@
 targeted to satisfy Garbe's personal needs whenever conflicts appear.
 dwm had remained much more focused on its original goals,
 whereas its community-driven predecessor \fIwmii\fP had
-grown large and lost it's leanness.
+grown big and lost it's lean elegance.
 This should not happen to mmh.
 .P
-Mmh can also stand for \fImodern mail handler\fP, and this is
-the variant chosen as titel for this document. One main focus of the
+Mmh also stands for \fImodern mail handler\fP, and this is
+the variant chosen to entitel this document. One main focus of the
 project was to modernize nmh. Another main goal is resembled in the
 name \fIminimized mail handler\fP: Drop any parts that don't add
-to the main task of mmh, being a MUA.
+to the main task of mmh, being a conceptionally appealing MUA.
 .P
 It should also be noted that \fLstrcmp("mmh","nmh")<0\fP is true.
 Although mmh bases on nmh, it is likely seen as a step backward.
 I agree.
 However, this step backward actually is a step forward,
-although in another direction.
+although in a different direction.
 
 
 .H1 "This Thesis

--- a/ch03.roff	Sat May 19 17:26:15 2012 +0200
+++ b/ch03.roff	Sat May 19 17:57:20 2012 +0200
@@ -623,3 +623,16 @@
 .H1 "Code style
 .P
 foo
+
+
+
+(e.g. the
+user-visible access to whole messages and MIME parts are inherently
+different).
+
+The \fIMH library\fP
+.Fn libmh.a
+collects a bunch of standard functions that many of the MH tools need,
+like reading the profile or context files.
+This doesn't hurt the separation.
+