[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Politics and anoouncing
On Wed, 4 Aug 1999, Thomas Ricks wrote:
> I just joined your mailing list today. I had intended to listen for a
> few weeks before commenting, but I can't help but speak up on this one.
> I apologize.
> In my opinion, the vi editor is sort of a system utility that any
> experienced UNIX user anywhere should rightfully expect to be present on
> any installation. Kind of like editor in DOS. By all means use a
> friendlier editor by default, but install vi too! The fact that it is
> installed doesn't mean that it will be forced on users, just that it
> will be available if it is ever needed.
I couldn't agree more. Linking vi to pico is, IMNSHO, a BAD idea. If
people start of using 'vi' from the indy project, then move to a different
install, or machine, or shell account, then type vi, they'll get a totally
different editor, not good.
Having VI on the system is not the same as forcing people to use it,
unless no other editors are installed. I say install vi, but install
something like pico as well, and in the docs, refer to pico.
I started using vi because when I started with Linux, it was the only
editor I'd heard about, so I just tried it, couldn't use it, downloaded
the manual, read the man page, learnt how to use it, still using it daily
now. I'm not saying that's a good thing, but if we state in the resources
that come with the distribution that it installs pico (or whatever) as
well as vi, and recommend pico for the beginners it would be a better
VI has become one of the standard *nix editors, to not include it in an
install would be like not including /bin/bash.
,====================| S H U N A N T I O N L I N E |===================,
| David M. Webster '------------------------------' (aka cogNiTioN) |
| email@example.com |=============| cognite.net will be online RSN. |
'====== I use Linux everyday to up my productivity - so up yours! ======'