On Friday 19 May 2006 10:25, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > Today, after upgrading my system, suddenly mcedit became the default > editor, rather than vim as I expected it. Investigating showed that some > funny guy decided that mcedit could use a priority of 100, whereas vim > had fallen back to 60 since the latest upgrade. > > Fixing this wasn't very hard, but it made me consider why we let a > maintainer decide what the alternative priority of an editor would be. I > mean, if you maintain a package, you probably like the editor very much, > probably more so than any of the other editors in Debian; so you're > quite biased. This would mean you would be the worst person to make an > objective choice as to what the best priority for your editor would be. > Granted, for some things the Policy defines the amount of points you can > add to your priority based on the features your program has, but it > doesn't do so for everything (unless I've missed something), which means > that it's not a definite solution. It's also not at all guaranteed that > doing it this way is actually useful. > > So, instead of using static feature lists to define an application's > priority with which it would be configured in the alternatives system, > why not use popcon data to do that instead? Using popcon would ensure > that the applications which most people prefer would be the default; > this is a fair and objective criterion.
You would end up with nvi or nano as editors, since they are installed by default. Probably more as viewer and so on. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]