I agree a weighting of 3 is too much but am of the opinion vi still needs to be in the objectives. If we going to cover a terminal text editor it might as well be vi/vim. Why cover a text editor? Because Linux is primarily command line interface and configuration is done via text files. Its somewhat more complex than point and click of windows and I wouldn't be surprised to see them covering terminal editors in their objectives in the near future.
On 15/10/2017 23:31, Anselm Lingnau wrote: > Sergio Belkin wrote: > >> Hi, Please in connection to vi/vim, please could we to refrein of give >> opinion based on our likes/dislikes? > The traditional factual arguments in favour of vi are becoming so flimsy that > today basically the main argument for having vi on the exam at all is “I like > it that way”. (For example, the messed-up-terminal-support argument hits vi > just as hard as any other screen-oriented editor. Sure, you can always run vi > in ex mode, but we don't cover ex mode on the exam, which is probably just as > well. It doesn't matter what editor is in your minimal recovery install when > chances are that if your machine doesn't do what it should you will simply > regenerate it using Vagrant or Ansible or whatever tickles your fancy – after > all, we no longer want to tweak individual machines until they work, today > it's all about automated reproducibility. And so on.) > > Also, do note that the LPIC exam doesn't cover vim. It covers vi. The common > implementation of a vaguely vi-like editor on today's Linux systems happens > to > be vim, but vim's functionality is a vast superset of the “vi” functionality > that is mentioned in the objectives. Nobody today actually wants to use vi – > these days virtually anyone who is into “vi” uses vim instead, but vim, for > any number of very good reasons, is not on the LPI exam and arguably doesn't > belong there. > > If we must keep vi, let's downgrade it to weight 1 instead of weight 3. That > will free up weight points for use elsewhere in the exam where they are > needed > much more urgently, and it won't be such a big thing if people decide to > treat > vi lightly or skip it altogether in favour of more reasonable alternatives. > > Anselm -- Mark Clarke 📱 +2711-781 8014 🌍 www.JumpingBean.co.za _______________________________________________ lpi-examdev mailing list lpi-examdev@lpi.org http://list.lpi.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lpi-examdev
