On 5/25/2013 13:24, Chris Rees wrote:
On 25 May 2013 11:54, Niclas Zeising<zeising+free...@daemonic.se> wrote:
On 05/25/13 10:50, Chris Rees wrote:
Alternatively, perhaps we need an editors/vim-options port????
Just for the record, editors/vim was (and shells/bash) was converted to
optionsNG not too long ago.
Ah, that's at least some good news. I notice that it was on yet
another maintainer timeout, so that criticism stands.
It appears that David is no longer interested.
FWIW, the default on the vim port have taken the dports users by
surprise. I've gotten several complaints about the boatload of ports
that get sucked in (and the amount of bandwidth it requires) by vim.
They didn't know vim-lite existed.
I agree the default should be "light" and the kitchen sink version
should be explicitly requested (if two ports are indeed needed for
pre-built binary reasons).
John
_______________________________________________
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
