Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 22:56:42 -0500 From: Richard Coleman <richardcoleman@mindspring.com> To: Scott Long <scottl@freebsd.org> Cc: obrien@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/release/scripts print-cdrom-packages.sh Message-ID: <3FCABBFA.9010200@mindspring.com> In-Reply-To: <3FCAB702.4040603@freebsd.org> References: <200311292348.hATNmi50060667@repoman.freebsd.org> <20031201032205.GA41354@dragon.nuxi.com> <3FCAB702.4040603@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Scott Long wrote: >> Why isn't it "lite"? >> -rw-r--r-- 1 portmgr archive 2M Nov 18 01:09 >> vim-lite-6.2.139.tbz >> >> Lets look at the Emacs editors you left behind: >> -rw-r--r-- 1 portmgr archive 11M Nov 21 17:21 emacs-21.3.tbz >> >> I predict you will become very unpopular for this commit. >> Please remove Emacs instead. >> > > I think that you failed to see that there was both 'vim' and 'vim-lite'. > In the interest of saving space, one needed to go. I'm happy to discuss > which of the two is more appropriate, but I'm adamant that I will remain > silent on an emacs v. vi debate. Actually, leaving vim-lite rather than vim may be preferable. Those who really want gvim, or vim compiled with their favorite interpreter built in (perl, python, tcl, whatever) will want to recompile anyways. And the default build for vim uses the GTK1 libraries, and that's getting kinda dated. But, it's not a bad deal, one way or the other. Just a suggestion. Richard Coleman richardcoleman@mindspring.com
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3FCABBFA.9010200>