Re: vim/nvi priority Re: moving mutt to standard priority
On 05-Oct-99, 19:15 (CDT), Steve Greenland <stevegr@debian.org> wrote:
> On 05-Oct-99, 04:00 (CDT), Marco d'Itri <md@linux.it> wrote:
>
> > I agree... Why does it [vim] have a lower priority in alternatives
> > than nvi?
>
> I don't know. That's not what I remember from the discussion amongst the
> various vi and editor maintainers when we set the relative priorities,
> but unfortunately I cleaned out that discusssion just a few months ago.
> If I remember correctly, Dale Sheetz guided that discussion, maybe he
> can post the final list.
Ah ha! Found a remnant (Somone's reply to Dale's message). I won't claim
it as the final version, but it shows the thinking. Note vim is above
nvi...
Date: Wed, 5 Nov 1997 15:51:35 +0100
Subject: Re: Revised priority list and other corrections.
According to Dale Scheetz:
> Here is my proposed priority list:
>
> elvis 120
> vim 110
> Standard ____ nvi 100
>
> jed 80
> joe 70
> beav 60
> ed 50
> ee 40
> pico 30
> elvis-tiny 20
> Base ____ ae 10
> emacs 0
> kedit -10
> wily -20
> axe -30
> fte -40
> sam -50
> sex -60
> xcoral -70
> xwpe -80
>
> xemacs -100
--
Steve Greenland <vmole@swbell.net>
(Please do not CC me on mail sent to this list; I subscribe to and read
every list I post to.)
Reply to: