On Sun, 13 Jun 1999 at 12:22, Joseph Carter wrote about "Re: Editor and...":
> I'm about to be harsh on you, so I shall apologize in advance.
As long as we're not commenting on each other's anatomy parts, I think I
can deal with it. ;-)
> Barring the argument that sensible-editor assumes sensible-user who would
> never use such a braindead and bloated piece of software for any
> practical purpose, your argument demonstrates that you need to be fwopped
Fine. But given that pico is a package within Debian (non-free, whatever;
it's still a package). Why I use pico shouldn't concern anybody else.
> #!/bin/bash
> shopt -s execfail
> exec ${VISUAL:-${EDITOR:-editor}} "$@"
Yes, I saw this. But I didn't see, like the following two lines, something
that supported pico OUTSIDE of the VISUAL or EDITOR environment variables.
> exec ae "$@"
> exec vi "$@"
> echo "Couldn't find an editor!" 1>&2
> echo "Set the \$EDITOR environment variable to your desired editor." 1>&2
> exit 1
>
> If you believe this does not support pico the way setting EDITOR in your
> environment does, I must say PEBKAC and you need to go back and look over
> bash(1) again very badly.
I believe it does. I wanted "native" support.
> If all of this does not make sense to you, probably you should not be
> trying to second or object to policy proposals. As you also do not
> appear to be in my developer keyring, either you have not yet been added,
> you're not a developer, or your key does not include your name.
It all makes perfect sense, I'm not a developer, no key and none on the
ring. It made perfect sense beforehand and it makes perfect sense now. I
would still like to see a "hard-coded" line for pico, like there is for ae
or vi. That's all I wanted.
> If you are not a developer, your opinions are still welcome, however only
> developers should be making formal seconds and objections to policy
> proposals and ammendments. In the meantime, *FWOP FWOP FWOP*, you
> deserve it. =p
Even if my opinions were not welcome, I'd still be giving them. ;-)
And while, you may be right (I'm not saying you are) that developers
should be the only ones seconding and objecting -- do we even have a
formal policy on proposals? Yes, Manoj has something...but does policy
refer to it? And is this discussed in Manoj's document? (sorry, haven't
taken a look)
*Steel, non-developer armor protects me the whole time*
--
Brock Rozen brozen@torah.org
Director of Technical Services (410) 602-1350
Project Genesis http://www.torah.org/
Attachment:
pgpqWqJXxMS2A.pgp
Description: PGP signature