Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Fedora Developers Restart Talk Over Using Nano As The Default Text Editor

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • swagg_boi
    replied
    `ed` is the standard Unix text editor.

    Repent and export EDITOR='ed'

    Leave a comment:


  • geearf
    replied
    I use a lot nano, even to program. Anything that defaults to vi gets changed right away to nano.
    At some point I did know how to use emacs, but it's been such a long time now I don't know why I gave it up for nano. I clearly remember why I dislike vi though. but maybe using it for a decade or more would have been enough to get used to it.

    Leave a comment:


  • JustinTurdeau
    replied
    Originally posted by jacob View Post
    Fedora is a workstation/laptop distro. In a default out of the box install such machines don't and shouldn't even have a SSH server.
    No it's not. Even the old Fedora project leader said on these forums a while back that some large orgs are using it as a server distro. Also, even desktop machines need to use a text console sometimes, for example in rescue mode, where a text editor is extremely useful.

    Just because you have preconceived notions of what Fedora is and only live inside a GUI, doesn't mean everyone else is the same.

    Leave a comment:


  • jacob
    replied
    Originally posted by JustinTurdeau View Post

    That doesn't cover the use case of remote editing over SSH (or a serial port) though. So you'd still need a default TUI editor.
    Fedora is a workstation/laptop distro. In a default out of the box install such machines don't and shouldn't even have a SSH server.

    Leave a comment:


  • gnulinux82
    replied
    Originally posted by JustinTurdeau View Post
    dte: easier than nano for the typical user and much more capable.
    As a long-time (casual) nano user, dte seems really nice. There's no help bar at the bottom like nano, but most of the default bindings seem pretty obvious. It seems a lot more customizable too.

    Leave a comment:


  • GDJacobs
    replied
    What a waste of time.

    For anyone who thinks vim is difficult to use, meet my friends ed and teco.

    Leave a comment:


  • JustinTurdeau
    replied
    Originally posted by jacob View Post
    I'm actually less and less convinced that for Fedora the standard shouldn't be a graphical editor like gedit.
    That doesn't cover the use case of remote editing over SSH (or a serial port) though. So you'd still need a default TUI editor.

    Leave a comment:


  • jacob
    replied
    Originally posted by ix900 View Post

    No, you're not the only one. I won't use it unless there's literally no choice (always been that way; never liked it). Would even prefer if all copies were burned and removed from life. lol

    All Fedora devs need to do is to give a choice. Let people who really want it to have it and give a list with other choices. They just won't. There's only one to rule them all by default. Everyone who doesn't want the default just uses whatever and that's fine too so they should stop thinking about it really and go fix bugs because there's plenty of those out there.
    The "one to rule them all" approach is a necessary precondition to building a deliverable, documentable and supportable product. That of course does not preclude having dozens of various alternative editors in the repos, but there must be the one true editor that is guaranteed to always be present and personally I'm pretty convinced that that standard editor shouldn't be vi. I'm actually less and less convinced that for Fedora the standard shouldn't be a graphical editor like gedit.

    Leave a comment:


  • JustinTurdeau
    replied
    Originally posted by jacob View Post
    That software is utter garbage in every way possible.
    Yep. In vim, eval.c and the various other eval*.c files are about 25,000 lines of unmaintainable garbage. That's more code than the entirety of some other editors.

    Even the neovim developers have barely scratched the surface of cleaning up the awfulness of the core codebase. They're mostly just heaping more and more features on the dung pile.

    Originally posted by jacob View Post
    Its user interface was fine by f'ing 1972 standards, today it defies every bit of accumulated knowledge of good UI design as well as every convention expected by users (other than hardcode vi fans, that is)
    It's a classic example of what happens when a codebase slowly evolves around someone's harebrained, ad-hoc ideas of how to solve a problem instead of having a clean and coherent design. It's irredeemable at this point.
    Last edited by JustinTurdeau; 25 June 2020, 10:35 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • ix900
    replied
    Originally posted by jacob View Post

    Frankly am I the only one who doesn't understand the enduring love for vi? That software is utter garbage in every way possible. Its user interface was fine by f'ing 1972 standards, today it defies every bit of accumulated knowledge of good UI design as well as every convention expected by users (other than hardcode vi fans, that is). Plus it's so famous for its bugs that clones must explicitly and deliberately implement the same bugs to be compatible. I say, to the dustbin of history with it, and good riddance.
    No, you're not the only one. I won't use it unless there's literally no choice (always been that way; never liked it). Would even prefer if all copies were burned and removed from life. lol

    All Fedora devs need to do is to give a choice. Let people who really want it to have it and give a list with other choices. They just won't. There's only one to rule them all by default. Everyone who doesn't want the default just uses whatever and that's fine too so they should stop thinking about it really and go fix bugs because there's plenty of those out there.
    Last edited by ix900; 25 June 2020, 09:34 PM.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X