[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Editor Priorities

begin  Santiago Vila  quotation:

> m@moshez.org:
> > * Not free -200 [changed from -50] XXX
> Oh, while we are at it, why not -1000000000 or just forbid non-free
> editors to use the "editor" alternatives? :-)
> Not that I use pico very much (my usual editor is emacs, in fact, I
> have not used pico for a looooong time), but this is not a technical
> feature and should only serve to favour a free editor over a non-free
> one, provided they have the same features, so -1 would be appropriate.
> Users of non-free packages already pay the price of having to retrieve
> them from ftp. If you install a non-free editor, presumably it is
> because you want to use it.
> As I said, I don't care for myself, but I believe the list should
> be based on technical merits only.

I had missed that one in the feature list. Thanks for pointing it out. I
agree with you completely. I don't mind a -1 score to prefer a free over
a non-free editor that otherwise are of equal preference (say, nano over
pico), but -200, or even the original -50, is ridiculous.


Attachment: pgpG6eC1sGc6_.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: