Aaron J. Grier wrote:
On Sun, Mar 02, 2008 at 05:46:48AM -0800, Joshua Juran wrote:
*everyone* has access to said 'smart' terminals these days. (Anyone
still using a dumb terminal must be assumed to prefer it.) But
somehow, it's mysteriously difficult to make remote file editing not
suck. Or maybe nobody cares enough.
how do you want to disassemble the problem? remotely accessing a
running editor has existing hateful partial-solutions (X, screen, remote
desktop). a local editor accessing a remote file has existing
partial-hateful solutions (SMB, NFS, FTP, HTTP). allowing the "remote"
bits of file editing to be put into an editor would result in a
veritable plethora of hateful one-per-editor "remote file access"
implementations, which I'm sure emacs and vim have already implemented.
That's exactly what I hate about collaborative editors, like SubEthaEdit,
which is just the next level up from remote editing.
There is Sobby, a daemon to coordinate collaborative editing. Since the
protocol is public, any editor can (potentially) talk to Sobby and thus edit
documents. Unfortunately, only Gobby speaks the protocol and Gobby is garbage.
--
7. Not allowed to add “In accordance with the prophesy” to the end of
answers I give to a question an officer asks me.
-- The 213 Things Skippy Is No Longer Allowed To Do In The U.S. Army
http://skippyslist.com/list/
