Re: Should the default editor be changed from vi to nano on upgrades to Fedora 33+
On Fri, Dec 4, 2020 at 7:23 AM Dridi Boukelmoune wrote: > > > > Maybe I need to reboot my system for vim to take over again? > > > > You will at least need to logout and log back in. > > You're right, if I force a login instead of plain sudo it becomes apparent: > > $ sudo env | grep EDITOR > $ sudo su -c env | grep EDITOR > $ sudo su - -c env | grep EDITOR > EDITOR=/usr/bin/vim Actually, the package vim-default-editor is useless for sudo usage where there is no formal login happening. Regardless of whether I logged out and in my regular user session after installing it I still get nano as the root user editor. ___ 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
Re: Should the default editor be changed from vi to nano on upgrades to Fedora 33+
Ben Cotton wrote: > ...changes in default behavior, when 1. technically reasonable and 2. > not explicitly overridden by the user, should generally be made on > upgrade. I disagree. Upgrades should be as unsurprising as possible and keep user configuration as much as possible. Changes in defaults should normally (i.e., where technically reasonable) only be done for new installs. For upgrades, any changes should normally be opt-in, not opt-out. > Distributions are supposed to be opinionated No, absolutely not. Distributions are supposed to be at the users' service, not the other way round. > and in cases where the user has accepted our opinion, we should do our > best to provide it whether the system in question is an upgrade or a fresh > install. But as you state it: > The difficulty here is cases where the user also has an opinion that > formerly aligned with the distribution's opinion and no longer does. Just because the user agreed with your former opinion does not mean they will agree with you making a U-turn on it as well. And please note that this is NOT about my personal editor preference: I personally think nano is the much more user-friendly editor and my vi knowledge is limited to ":q!". So I think the new default definitely makes sense, for new installations, and I'll happily take the opt-in when I upgrade my systems. (I rarely use the default editor because I mostly use GUIs, so I usually just temporarily override EDITOR to something sane, usually kwrite because I'm in a GUI environment, and have never bothered actually setting EDITOR systemwide.) I just do not agree that the default editor should be forcefully changed for all existing installations. Also because, each time I upgrade Fedora, I routinely have to go through the list of Changes and undo whatever can be undone. > In most cases, the benefits to a consistent experience outweigh the > detriments of the user having to explicitly override an opinion. I think not making surprising changes to existing installations is more important than consistency between old/upgraded and new installations. > (I include the phrase "technically reasonable" above to account for > cases like changing the default file system, which is not something > you'd particularly want to try changing on existing systems at upgrade > time) Of course, my opposite opinion should be understood with the same limitation: Sometimes it is just not technically reasonable to keep supporting the old default, e.g., if it depends on some software package that is no longer maintained upstream. (E.g., I am NOT proposing that the KDE Spin should keep defaulting to Plasma 5 for upgrades after Plasma 6 is out, that would make no sense.) But where it is technically reasonable, changes should always be opt-in, not opt-out, for upgrades. Kevin Kofler ___ 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
Re: Should the default editor be changed from vi to nano on upgrades to Fedora 33+
On Fri, Dec 4, 2020 at 9:01 AM Simo Sorce wrote: > > 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 > > 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. > The intent is to make it the system-wide default when the user has no setting. If the user has a setting in their profile, then that is respected, regardless of whether the package is installed or not. -- 真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth! ___ 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
Re: Should the default editor be changed from vi to nano on upgrades to Fedora 33+
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 > 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
Re: Should the default editor be changed from vi to nano on upgrades to Fedora 33+
Dne 04. 12. 20 v 12:36 Marius Schwarz napsal(a): Am 03.12.20 um 21:06 schrieb Ben Cotton: ...changes in default behavior, when 1. technically reasonable and 2. not explicitly overridden by the user, should generally be made on upgrade. Distributions are supposed to be opinionated, and in cases where the user has accepted our opinion, we should do our best to provide it whether the system in question is an upgrade or a fresh install. Has anyone made any test on installed system, how man of them got changed by theire users to reflect a trend on changes in the user favor for vi or nano? Or simpler: on which numbers has this decission been made? It is a "oh, i like nano and hate vim, so i suggest to change it" case or the "we asked 10.000 users which editor they favor?" one? One of those is a good base for a change proprosal, the other one not. I, i.E., favor vi, as it has advantages. Wasn't this already thoroughly discussed in the original change proposal ML thread? https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/U5C4CC2O44E7Q4MVTT772NP667HTP25S/#U5C4CC2O44E7Q4MVTT772NP667HTP25S Vít Best regards, Marius Schwarz ___ 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 OpenPGP_0x0CE09EE79917B87C.asc Description: application/pgp-keys OpenPGP_signature Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ 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
Re: Should the default editor be changed from vi to nano on upgrades to Fedora 33+
Am 03.12.20 um 21:06 schrieb Ben Cotton: ...changes in default behavior, when 1. technically reasonable and 2. not explicitly overridden by the user, should generally be made on upgrade. Distributions are supposed to be opinionated, and in cases where the user has accepted our opinion, we should do our best to provide it whether the system in question is an upgrade or a fresh install. Has anyone made any test on installed system, how man of them got changed by theire users to reflect a trend on changes in the user favor for vi or nano? Or simpler: on which numbers has this decission been made? It is a "oh, i like nano and hate vim, so i suggest to change it" case or the "we asked 10.000 users which editor they favor?" one? One of those is a good base for a change proprosal, the other one not. I, i.E., favor vi, as it has advantages. Best regards, Marius Schwarz ___ 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
Re: Should the default editor be changed from vi to nano on upgrades to Fedora 33+
On 12/4/20 9:40 AM, Till Maas wrote: Hi, On Thu, Dec 03, 2020 at 08:30:45PM +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote: Changing the default on upgrades is good because the Fedora 33+ experience is similar regardless whether the system is freshly installed or upgraded. in this specific case, the argument for making nano default was that it is easier to use than vi. In case of a system upgrade, the users are already familiar with vi or changed their editor. Therefore it seems to be more disturbing to change this default during upgrade. Or they have never yet needed to use the default editor. -- Miro Hrončok -- Phone: +420777974800 IRC: mhroncok ___ 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
Re: Should the default editor be changed from vi to nano on upgrades to Fedora 33+
On 12/3/20 8:30 PM, Miro Hrončok wrote: Hello, we have changed the default editor from vi to nano on Fedora 33+. The change proposal says: > Will not apply to upgrades. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/UseNanoByDefault#Upgrade.2Fcompatibility_impact However, currently, it does apply to upgrades: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1896707 The bugzilla was closed, so I've updated the change proposal upgrade impact section accordingly (we can revert that edit if people fight back). -- Miro Hrončok -- Phone: +420777974800 IRC: mhroncok ___ 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
Re: Should the default editor be changed from vi to nano on upgrades to Fedora 33+
> Am 04.12.2020 um 09:40 schrieb Till Maas : > > Hi, > > On Thu, Dec 03, 2020 at 08:30:45PM +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote: > >> Changing the default on upgrades is good because the Fedora 33+ experience >> is similar regardless whether the system is freshly installed or upgraded. > > … already familiar with vi or changed their editor. Therefore it seems to > be more disturbing to change this default during upgrade. > > Thanks > Till I strongly agree! ___ 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
Re: Should the default editor be changed from vi to nano on upgrades to Fedora 33+
Hi, On Thu, Dec 03, 2020 at 08:30:45PM +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote: > Changing the default on upgrades is good because the Fedora 33+ experience > is similar regardless whether the system is freshly installed or upgraded. in this specific case, the argument for making nano default was that it is easier to use than vi. In case of a system upgrade, the users are already familiar with vi or changed their editor. Therefore it seems to be more disturbing to change this default during upgrade. Thanks Till ___ 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
Re: Should the default editor be changed from vi to nano on upgrades to Fedora 33+
> > Maybe I need to reboot my system for vim to take over again? > > You will at least need to logout and log back in. You're right, if I force a login instead of plain sudo it becomes apparent: $ sudo env | grep EDITOR $ sudo su -c env | grep EDITOR $ sudo su - -c env | grep EDITOR EDITOR=/usr/bin/vim Thanks! ___ 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
Re: Should the default editor be changed from vi to nano on upgrades to Fedora 33+
On 12/3/20 10:52 PM, Dridi Boukelmoune wrote: puts setting EDITOR environment variable into a file (vim-default-editor.sh for bash, ksh, sh and zsh, vim-default-editor.csh for tcsh and vim-default-editor.fish for fish), which is installed under a specific directory (/etc/profile.d for bash, tcsh, sh, ksh and zsh, /usr/share/fish/vendor_conf.d for fish). It sets EDITOR for all users. Maybe I need to reboot my system for vim to take over again? You will at least need to logout and log back in. ___ 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
Re: Should the default editor be changed from vi to nano on upgrades to Fedora 33+
> actually Vim ships vim-default-editor subpackage now, which conflicts I did install it, but that didn't seem to have an immediate effect. > with nano-default-editor via virtual provide 'system-default-editor'. It I don't have that package on my system: $ sudo dnf remove nano-default-editor No match for argument: nano-default-editor No packages marked for removal. [...] $ sudo dnf remove *-default-editor -x vim-default-editor All matches were filtered out by exclude filtering for argument: *-default-editor No packages marked for removal. > puts setting EDITOR environment variable into a file > (vim-default-editor.sh for bash, ksh, sh and zsh, vim-default-editor.csh > for tcsh and vim-default-editor.fish for fish), which is installed under > a specific directory (/etc/profile.d for bash, tcsh, sh, ksh and zsh, > /usr/share/fish/vendor_conf.d for fish). It sets EDITOR for all users. Maybe I need to reboot my system for vim to take over again? ___ 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
Re: Should the default editor be changed from vi to nano on upgrades to Fedora 33+
On 12/3/20 9:46 PM, Tom Hughes via devel wrote: > >> 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 > > Setting EDITOR doesn't really work. I mean I have that but my problem > is always when I'm sudoing and suddenly get nano instead of vi which > isn't solved by that. Hi Tom, actually Vim ships vim-default-editor subpackage now, which conflicts with nano-default-editor via virtual provide 'system-default-editor'. It puts setting EDITOR environment variable into a file (vim-default-editor.sh for bash, ksh, sh and zsh, vim-default-editor.csh for tcsh and vim-default-editor.fish for fish), which is installed under a specific directory (/etc/profile.d for bash, tcsh, sh, ksh and zsh, /usr/share/fish/vendor_conf.d for fish). It sets EDITOR for all users. > > Tom > -- Zdenek Dohnal Software Engineer Red Hat Czech - Brno TPB-C OpenPGP_0x15AA6A7F4D4227D7.asc Description: application/pgp-keys OpenPGP_signature Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ 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
Re: Should the default editor be changed from vi to nano on upgrades to Fedora 33+
On 03/12/2020 20:41, Ben Cotton wrote: On Thu, Dec 3, 2020 at 3:32 PM Tom Hughes via devel 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 Oh sorry I only read the change proposal. I didn't realise this had actually accidentally happened and I thought it was being proposed for the next release. Obviously I missed it by using distro-sync instead of system-upgrade for my systems ;-) 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 Setting EDITOR doesn't really work. I mean I have that but my problem is always when I'm sudoing and suddenly get nano instead of vi which isn't solved by that. Tom -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://compton.nu/ ___ 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
Re: Should the default editor be changed from vi to nano on upgrades to Fedora 33+
On Thu, Dec 3, 2020 at 3:32 PM Tom Hughes via devel 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 -- Ben Cotton He / Him / His Senior Program Manager, Fedora & CentOS Stream Red Hat TZ=America/Indiana/Indianapolis ___ 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
Re: Should the default editor be changed from vi to nano on upgrades to Fedora 33+
On 03/12/2020 20:06, Ben Cotton wrote: On Thu, Dec 3, 2020 at 2:33 PM Miro Hrončok wrote: Should we try to "fix" this by ensuring the default does not change on upgrades? Or should we acknowledge that it does? I think we should acknowledge that it does because... Changing the default on upgrades is good because the Fedora 33+ experience is similar regardless whether the system is freshly installed or upgraded. ...changes in default behavior, when 1. technically reasonable and 2. not explicitly overridden by the user, should generally be made on upgrade. Distributions are supposed to be opinionated, and in cases where the user has accepted our opinion, we should do our best to provide it whether the system in question is an upgrade or a fresh install. 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? If I accept our argument then how do I choose not to accept your opinion and "explicitly override" this choice? Tom -- Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu) http://compton.nu/ ___ 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
Re: Should the default editor be changed from vi to nano on upgrades to Fedora 33+
On Thu, Dec 03, 2020 at 02:32:20PM -0500, Neal Gompa wrote: > On Thu, Dec 3, 2020 at 2:31 PM Miro Hrončok wrote: > > > > Hello, > > > > we have changed the default editor from vi to nano on Fedora 33+. > > > > The change proposal says: > > > > > Will not apply to upgrades. > > > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/UseNanoByDefault#Upgrade.2Fcompatibility_impact > > > > However, currently, it does apply to upgrades: > > > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1896707 > > > > Should we try to "fix" this by ensuring the default does not change on > > upgrades? > > Or should we acknowledge that it does? > > > > (It's currently seems easier to acknowledge it than to ensure it doesn't > > change, > > but let's try to discuss this without using that as an argument.) > > > > > > Changing the default on upgrades is good because the Fedora 33+ experience > > is > > similar regardless whether the system is freshly installed or upgraded. > > > > Not changing the default on upgrades is good because users might be > > surprised by > > the change. > > > > > > I lean towards the "change the default on upgrades as well" option. > > > > The only reason it wasn't "change on upgrades" was because it wasn't > supported in the package manager. Now that it is, we should just "fix" > the change document and add some errata to the release notes about > reverting on upgrade. I agree. Seems easier to just make it apply to upgrades. kevin signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ 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
Re: Should the default editor be changed from vi to nano on upgrades to Fedora 33+
On Thu, Dec 3, 2020 at 2:33 PM Miro Hrončok wrote: > > Should we try to "fix" this by ensuring the default does not change on > upgrades? > Or should we acknowledge that it does? > I think we should acknowledge that it does because... > Changing the default on upgrades is good because the Fedora 33+ experience is > similar regardless whether the system is freshly installed or upgraded. > ...changes in default behavior, when 1. technically reasonable and 2. not explicitly overridden by the user, should generally be made on upgrade. Distributions are supposed to be opinionated, and in cases where the user has accepted our opinion, we should do our best to provide it whether the system in question is an upgrade or a fresh install. The difficulty here is cases where the user also has an opinion that formerly aligned with the distribution's opinion and no longer does. In most cases, the benefits to a consistent experience outweigh the detriments of the user having to explicitly override an opinion. (I include the phrase "technically reasonable" above to account for cases like changing the default file system, which is not something you'd particularly want to try changing on existing systems at upgrade time) -- Ben Cotton He / Him / His Senior Program Manager, Fedora & CentOS Stream Red Hat TZ=America/Indiana/Indianapolis ___ 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
Re: Should the default editor be changed from vi to nano on upgrades to Fedora 33+
On Thu, Dec 3, 2020 at 2:31 PM Miro Hrončok wrote: > > Hello, > > we have changed the default editor from vi to nano on Fedora 33+. > > The change proposal says: > > > Will not apply to upgrades. > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/UseNanoByDefault#Upgrade.2Fcompatibility_impact > > However, currently, it does apply to upgrades: > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1896707 > > Should we try to "fix" this by ensuring the default does not change on > upgrades? > Or should we acknowledge that it does? > > (It's currently seems easier to acknowledge it than to ensure it doesn't > change, > but let's try to discuss this without using that as an argument.) > > > Changing the default on upgrades is good because the Fedora 33+ experience is > similar regardless whether the system is freshly installed or upgraded. > > Not changing the default on upgrades is good because users might be surprised > by > the change. > > > I lean towards the "change the default on upgrades as well" option. > The only reason it wasn't "change on upgrades" was because it wasn't supported in the package manager. Now that it is, we should just "fix" the change document and add some errata to the release notes about reverting on upgrade. -- 真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth! ___ 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
Should the default editor be changed from vi to nano on upgrades to Fedora 33+
Hello, we have changed the default editor from vi to nano on Fedora 33+. The change proposal says: > Will not apply to upgrades. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/UseNanoByDefault#Upgrade.2Fcompatibility_impact However, currently, it does apply to upgrades: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1896707 Should we try to "fix" this by ensuring the default does not change on upgrades? Or should we acknowledge that it does? (It's currently seems easier to acknowledge it than to ensure it doesn't change, but let's try to discuss this without using that as an argument.) Changing the default on upgrades is good because the Fedora 33+ experience is similar regardless whether the system is freshly installed or upgraded. Not changing the default on upgrades is good because users might be surprised by the change. I lean towards the "change the default on upgrades as well" option. -- Miro Hrončok -- Phone: +420777974800 IRC: mhroncok ___ 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
