From owner-cvs-src@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Nov 30 19:56:29 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: cvs-src@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D50A016A4CE; Sun, 30 Nov 2003 19:56:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from saturn.criticalmagic.com (saturn.criticalmagic.com [68.213.16.21]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7EA1243FBF; Sun, 30 Nov 2003 19:56:28 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from richardcoleman@mindspring.com) Received: from mindspring.com (titan.criticalmagic.com [68.213.16.23]) by saturn.criticalmagic.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D3C5E3BD10; Sun, 30 Nov 2003 22:56:27 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <3FCABBFA.9010200@mindspring.com> Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 22:56:42 -0500 From: Richard Coleman Organization: Critical Magic, Inc. User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031007 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Scott Long References: <200311292348.hATNmi50060667@repoman.freebsd.org> <20031201032205.GA41354@dragon.nuxi.com> <3FCAB702.4040603@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <3FCAB702.4040603@freebsd.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit cc: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org cc: src-committers@FreeBSD.org cc: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org cc: obrien@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/release/scripts print-cdrom-packages.sh X-BeenThere: cvs-src@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list Reply-To: richardcoleman@mindspring.com List-Id: CVS commit messages for the src tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 01 Dec 2003 03:56:30 -0000 Scott Long wrote: >> Why isn't it "lite"? >> -rw-r--r-- 1 portmgr archive 2M Nov 18 01:09 >> vim-lite-6.2.139.tbz >> >> Lets look at the Emacs editors you left behind: >> -rw-r--r-- 1 portmgr archive 11M Nov 21 17:21 emacs-21.3.tbz >> >> I predict you will become very unpopular for this commit. >> Please remove Emacs instead. >> > > I think that you failed to see that there was both 'vim' and 'vim-lite'. > In the interest of saving space, one needed to go. I'm happy to discuss > which of the two is more appropriate, but I'm adamant that I will remain > silent on an emacs v. vi debate. Actually, leaving vim-lite rather than vim may be preferable. Those who really want gvim, or vim compiled with their favorite interpreter built in (perl, python, tcl, whatever) will want to recompile anyways. And the default build for vim uses the GTK1 libraries, and that's getting kinda dated. But, it's not a bad deal, one way or the other. Just a suggestion. Richard Coleman richardcoleman@mindspring.com