Re: relevance of packages in repositories
On Sun, 07 May 2023 21:36:32 +0200
Michel Verdier <mv524@free.fr> wrote:
>And beside the fact we are on a debian forum, and that debian is much
>better than fedora and arch linux, all this don't answer the main
>problem : there is no package called neodim. If this is this neodim :
>
>https://github.com/zbirenbaum/neodim
It was already concluded we're supposed to be talking about Neovim, the
versions match and let's not nail someone down on typos in a grumpy
one-off shot. Using niche forks of niche 1970s-based editors (don't!
I'm a die-hard vim user and I love the 70s) one should better be
prepared for all sorts of frustration and maybe learn to handle it more
gracefully. For once it doesn't even look so great across the board:
https://repology.org/project/neovim/versions
Debian isn't alone anyway. Yes, it gets more love in Arch, Fedora, and
the (still) remarkably focused Void. At least for now! Does
*everything* else you expect? The Gentoo-way you could walk right away,
also with Debian. Building yourself is always an option, sometimes the
only one, just don't drop it system-wide. Speaking of relevance and
neovim and with due qualifications Popcon remains instructive: vim
#1061 vs. neovim #6607, still clocking in higher than I would've
guessed, but that is after all those years (forked in 2015). Out of
curiosity is anyone at all on this list using Neovim? Main editor? Nah.
I'm far from a Debian bigot but there's better reason to dump a whole
distribution, and important as a specific editor can be other things
you might try before. Like getting in touch with the team, maybe you
can help somehow. The user list isn't made for this and most packages
are relevant.
Oliver
Reply to: