Re: O: nvi - 4.4BSD re-implementation of vi
Hi Tobias!
On 2024-02-05 10:43, Tobias Heider wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 12:38:07AM +0000, Stuart Prescott wrote:
>>
>> The maintainer for the "nvi" package has indicated that he is unable to
>> maintain this package for the time being. I'm marking this package as orphaned
>> now.
>
> Looks like this is still orphaned over ten years later.
>
> As an active nvi user I would love to step up and help, but the biggest
> problem I see is that the choice of upstream project. Since the original
> is gone there isn't a clear successor.
>
> The BSDs all have their own forks which diverged over time (and those don't
> build on Linux).
> The other two options there are today are https://repo.or.cz/nvi.git which
> d/control currently points to and more recently https://github.com/lichray/nvi2.
>
> The first has a very low commit frequency (last commit was 2020, before
> that 2016) and sticks very closely to the original source. nvi2 has added
> new features such as multibyte support and is starting to receive bug fixes
> and features from the different *BSD forks.
>
> I have been thinking of proposing a new package for nvi2 but maybe it would
> make more sense to move this one to the more active upstream. It looks like
> some of the issues we are carrying patches for in Debian might be fixed there
> already and if not they seem active enough to merge our fixes.
>
> What would be the best way forward here? ITA and eventually switch the upstream
> or start a new package and let this one continue its slow death?
I think making the O bug and ITA and switching upstream is right thing to
do here, maybe explaining the history of the package in README.source.
I can't think think of a reasonable use case where nvi2 would not be
a suitable drop-in replacement for nvi; if neither can you (knowing
the editor way better than me!), then I'd say go for the switch.
I'll be happy reviewing/sponsoring if needed.
Cheers,
Paride
Reply to: