On Thu, 2008-12-11 at 17:19 -0900, Jeff Spaleta wrote: > Or let me ask it this way. Right now in the entire repository is > vim-minimal the only editor which is being explicitly required to > filling this fallback role? If it is, enshrine that as policy before I > get a chance to submit a package which falls back to nano. If its not > the only editor being used as a fallback in the repository, then some > compromise needs to be worked out so don't have people dragging in > multiple editors to fill the fallback capacity. calm down a bit here. The only reason it would have a hard requires on 'vi' would be if the software itself, without any options for $EDITOR, falls back to calling the hard path of /bin/vi. If your software does the same, but is hard coded to fall back to /usr/bin/nano, then that's fine, you'll have a requirement on nano. -- Jesse Keating Fedora -- Freedom² is a feature! identi.ca: http://identi.ca/jkeating
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
