On Wed, 3 Dec 2008 13:51:20 +0100 Marc Weber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On the other hand have you had a look at all those C lines within the > kernel? Or all the other applications you are using? But most projects, let's take OpenBSD for example, don't have a totally open commit process. I trust the small party of people who do examine every single line of the kernel on my behalf, so there's no need for me to look at it myself. And I only use what they publish, so I can be reasonably certain the code is good. But in a world where anybody could commit something, I could not trust it at all, because I cannot trust the whole world. > You have to take some risk. Who knows wether vim.org can be hacked as > well? Which is why most software is distributed with MD5 or SHA1 or SHA256 hashes along with signatures on those hashes, so you can be reasonably certain that what you're downloading is what the author intended. Features like this (done automatically by many package managers) would be a nice addition. > Abouth the *one* lib you're right as well :-) But at least this naming > seems to gain some interest and forces discussion.. There can't be the > one solution. But there can be one coming closer to most needs. Just to be slightly humorous, how about *That* One Vim Library? :D Package management in Vim is an interesting idea, though. Perhaps some inspiration could be drawn from the attempts that other editors, e.g. (X)Emacs have made in this arena as well. -- Taylor Christopher Venable http://real.metasyntax.net:2357/ How many shells could Shell sort sort if Shell sort could sort shells? --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "vim_use" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/vim_use?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
