Bug#682347: mark 'editor' virtual package name as obsolete

[Christoph Berg <myon@debian.org>]

Re: Russ Allbery 2017-08-24 <[🔎] 87efs1lyc7.fsf@hope.eyrie.org>
> Oh, thank you!  For some reason, apt-cache rdepends didn't show any of
> those packages.  All of them except dnsvi are Suggests, which basically
> doesn't accomplish anything.
> 
> Copying myon on this message as maintainer of dnsvi, which has a
> dependency on "vim | editor".  Christoph, we're proposing finally removing
> the editor virtual package completely, with the patch included here:

Thanks for the notice. I'm quite surprised that my dnsvi seems to be
the only package in Debian that requires a text editor. Given that our
base doesn't really include one, and getting dependencies Just Right
is among the things that Debian is really good at, dropping the
existing "editor" virtual package seems Just Wrong to me.

Even if "editor" was de-officialized in 1996, it is very much used
today. Bill's original list from 2015 was incomplete (it is much
longer now, but given that even emacs was missing, I'd think the grep
command used back then was wrong):

$ grep-dctrl -F Provides editor -nsPackage /var/lib/apt/lists/deb_debian_dists_sid_main_binary-amd64_Packages | xargs
deutex edbrowse emacs25 emacs25-lucid emacs25-nox fte-console
fte-terminal fte-xwindow jed xjed jove jupp le ledit levee lpe mg
xul-ext-password-editor nano nano-tiny ne pluma rlfe rlwrap scite
vigor vile xvile vim vim-athena vim-gtk vim-gtk3 vim-nox vim-tiny vis
xul-ext-exteditor

Wouldn't it much better (cleaner, more correct, more userfriendly) to
promote "editor" to official status instead?

Christoph