Re: RFC: Replacing vim-tiny with nano in essential packages
On Mon, Mar 16, 2020 at 11:06:11AM +0100, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> The rationale behind that suggestion is that the vim package is becoming more
> and more complex and hence more prone to build failures as can be seen from
> the current build logs [1]
I'd love any help fixing the test failures.
As far as priorities, whatever the project/ftp-masters decide is fine
with me. I've wanted to drop vim-tiny altogther, but that's been met
with resistance.
Cheers,
--
James
GPG Key: 4096R/91BF BF4D 6956 BD5D F7B7 2D23 DFE6 91AE 331B A3DB
Reply to: