Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2010 10:34:42 +0200 From: Lars Engels <lars.engels@0x20.net> To: Rob Farmer <rfarmer@predatorlabs.net> Cc: David DEMELIER <demelier.david@gmail.com>, FreeBSD Ports <ports@freebsd.org>, Wesley Shields <wxs@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: editors/vim installs to / Message-ID: <20100920083442.GA77193@e.0x20.net> In-Reply-To: <AANLkTik9GhTDUkjfu5rqPf9d7JjNyUisNGGTMKU9F1uG@mail.gmail.com> References: <4C93AA31.5080202@DataIX.net> <AANLkTik%2B1rvY4ZYgzHRjaX8PBfD1UqNCNeadHqg3KBfo@mail.gmail.com> <20100917205404.GA66620@atarininja.org> <AANLkTikUa0ikQLT%2BgxFXGZO3OyXomXzzBFb2Q65Dsoes@mail.gmail.com> <20100917232437.GC67059@atarininja.org> <AANLkTik9GhTDUkjfu5rqPf9d7JjNyUisNGGTMKU9F1uG@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--C7zPtVaVf+AK4Oqc Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, Sep 17, 2010 at 05:38:21PM -0700, Rob Farmer wrote: > On Fri, Sep 17, 2010 at 16:24, Wesley Shields <wxs@freebsd.org> wrote: > > On Fri, Sep 17, 2010 at 03:51:42PM -0700, Rob Farmer wrote: > >> On Fri, Sep 17, 2010 at 13:54, Wesley Shields <wxs@freebsd.org> wrote: > >> > While I agree that editors/vim could use the changes you're discussi= ng, > >> > do you really think such a comment is needed? Attacks like that are = not > >> > necessary. Let your code speak for itself. > >> > > >> > -- WXS > >> > >> This port has major issues and numerous polite requests (including > >> with patches) to fix them have been summarily ignored or rejected. So > >> don't act surprised when people start to get annoyed by the situation. > > > > I'm not surprised. I'm pointing out that attacks like that are not going > > to further the cause of getting the port the care you think it deserves. > > > > Unfortunately I don't know what the answer is beyond polite requests and > > patches to fix the problems as you see them. I do know that attacks are > > not the answer and are in fact harmful to achieving a goal. > > > > -- WXS > > >=20 > Fair enough. My apologies if my comments on this were too aggressive. >=20 > However, I still think it would benefit everyone if the maintainer > could provide an explanation for some of the current behavior and > would at least be open to discussion about changing it. The biggest > problem here, IMHO, is not the OPTIONS issue, but rather the use of > GTK 1 as the default. Plenty of ports don't support OPTIONS, even > though they could, and many users ignore options by setting BATCH, but > it isn't a big deal because the defaults are ideal for most > situations. I think either defaulting to GTK 2 or just making vim a > console application would eliminate most of these complaints. editors/vim-lite is console only. --C7zPtVaVf+AK4Oqc Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (FreeBSD) iEYEARECAAYFAkyXHKIACgkQKc512sD3afh6EQCfV8Trv5x/6tfLH4zcxPtuhRxK 7XgAn1xDwJBrZOwx3XtQ8wOKR/JVVYOc =Yxnm -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --C7zPtVaVf+AK4Oqc--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20100920083442.GA77193>