From owner-freebsd-current Wed May 22 10:08:50 1996 Return-Path: owner-current Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id KAA10813 for current-outgoing; Wed, 22 May 1996 10:08:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from covina.lightside.com (covina.lightside.com [198.81.209.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id KAA10808 for ; Wed, 22 May 1996 10:08:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: by covina.lightside.com (Smail3.1.28.1 #6) id m0uMHOl-0004KGC; Wed, 22 May 96 10:08 PDT Date: Wed, 22 May 1996 10:08:29 -0700 (PDT) From: Jake Hamby To: Chuck Robey cc: FreeBSD current Subject: Re: editors In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-current@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk Please do this! Pico is probably Unix's easiest editor to use, and also very popular. New users would benefit _greatly_ from this. Even experienced users might benefit in the sense that programs like vipw wouldn't start up ee, which I found greatly confusing since it sort of looked like vi, but wasn't compatible with anything I knew. I mean, whose idea was ee in the first place? I don't find it noticably "easier" than vi, nor any more powerful! ---Jake On Wed, 22 May 1996, Chuck Robey wrote: > This is about an easy editor, changing ee for pico. > > First, I want to say that I agree, anyone who is even slightly serious > about software should never use pico. Still, watching other students in > beginning C++ and Pascal classes using pico (because they CAN) when the > teacher keeps on pushing emacs and vi makes me understand that people > want an easily understandable editor, no matter what. > > That being the case, I have b'maked pico, and given it to Jordan. This > is a chance to everyone to comment, and tell me that replacing ee with > pico is wrong. If you don't want this to happen, now's your chance ...