On Wed, Jul 06, 2011 at 12:20:39PM +1000, Russell Dickenson <[email protected]> wrote: > Personally I would prefer to see another editor added to the 'base' > group but I understand the reasons for this decision. Essentially you > would only ever have to use this editor if you only did an > installation of the 'base' group and something was broken and required > you to fix a config file. The chances of not being able to install > another editor are very slim and in those circumstances, elvis is > available.
Just to clarify, my point so far is: - we don't want alternatives in base - a vi implementation is expected to be in base - elvis is a tiny vi implementation I'm open to replace elvis with something else if later it turns out that we have a better (and similar size, i.e. not vim) alternative vi implementation. If you want to talk about the "edit of base" in the doc, please refer to vi, the implementation name (elvis) is not really interesting. Thanks.
pgpXCbNCmEkq1.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Frugalware-devel mailing list [email protected] http://frugalware.org/mailman/listinfo/frugalware-devel
