On Thu, 2020-12-03 at 15:41 -0500, Ben Cotton wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 3, 2020 at 3:32 PM Tom Hughes via devel
> <devel@lists.fedoraproject.org> wrote:
> > What exactly does "change the default on upgrade" actually mean
> > here? Making nano-default-editor a dependency of something else
> > that people are likely to have installed? Or adding something to
> > some sort of post install script for system-upgrade that installs
> > that package?
> 
> From the BZ Miro linked to in the start of this thread:
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1896707#c12
> > dnf system-upgrade also upgrades groups, so nano-default-editor gets 
> > installed on system upgrades
> > If I accept our argument then how do I choose not to accept your
> > opinion and "explicitly override" this choice?
> 
> Also from that bug:
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1896707#c13
> > "dnf remove nano-default-editor". Alternatively, you can set "export 
> > EDITOR=vim" in your ~/.bash_profile


Shouldn't we just set export EDITOR=nano in the default profile and leave 
existing users alone?

I cannot see how change a *user default* vs a system default, can *ever* be 
acceptable.

Simo.

-- 
Simo Sorce
RHEL Crypto Team
Red Hat, Inc



_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Reply via email to