Re: shopping for an HTML editor

["Kelly Clowers" <kelly.clowers@gmail.com>]

On 1/25/07, Kamaraju Kusumanchi <kamaraju@bluebottle.com> wrote:
> On Thursday 25 January 2007 01:12, Marc Shapiro wrote:
> > Kamaraju Kusumanchi <kamaraju@bluebottle.com
> >
> > <mailto:kamaraju%40bluebottle.com>> said:
> > >  Sorry wrong wording on my part. When I said "it should look exactly
> > >  as it would appear on the net", I meant the editor to have a WYSIWYG
> > >  way of editing html pages.
> > >
> > >  HTML editing should be as easy as writing a texmacs or a word
> > >  document. It should not any complicated than that! There is no
> > >  misguidance there. nvu was doing the job just fine. I was merely
> > >  looking for a replacement for nvu.
> >
> > If you like nvu, then why not just use the tarball from nvu.com.  I know
> > it says that it is for Sid (and also says that it was built on Linspire)
> > but I just DL'd it to my Etch box and it seems to be working after just
> > untarring it.  What have you got to lose but the time it takes to DL?
> >
>
> upgrades, bug fixes etc., wont be as smooth as it would be if the package is
> in Debian. Tracking a software outside Debian is always a pain in the neck
> IMHO.
>
> raju

Nvu has not had any significant upgrades since 1.0 and the version that was in
Debian didn't have many bug-fixes either (my packages says version 1.0final-1).

A new HTML editor using Gecko 1.9 is being worked on (Nvu uses 1.7 I think),
but it is not even in beta yet and it looks like it will have a
different name. So
the Debian package has minimal advantages.



Cheers,
Kelly