Re: Vim 7.1 and aap?
Bram Moolenaar wrote: > > > Richard van der Leeden wrote: > >> Currently using AAP is still downloading and installing verison 7.0 (and >> all >> the patches). Will this be updated to load 7.1 instead? > > It's near the top of my todo list now. > >> I have altered my local copy of main.aap to get 7.1 (and change the >> latest >> patch number to 000) which seems to work fine. > > Yeah, that should be all. Using CVS it should already work. > > -- > hundred-and-one symptoms of being an internet addict: > 121. You ask for e-mail adresses instead of telephone numbers. > > /// Bram Moolenaar -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- http://www.Moolenaar.net > \\\ > ///sponsor Vim, vote for features -- http://www.Vim.org/sponsor/ > \\\ > \\\download, build and distribute -- http://www.A-A-P.org > /// > \\\help me help AIDS victims -- http://ICCF-Holland.org > /// > > Thanks Bram. I can confirm aap (with or without CVS) is now installing version 7.1. -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Vim-7.1-and-aap--tf3734936.html#a10575650 Sent from the Vim - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: Vim 7.1 and aap?
> Richard van der Leeden wrote: > > > Currently using AAP is still downloading and installing verison 7.0 (and all > > the patches). Will this be updated to load 7.1 instead? > > It's near the top of my todo list now. It's done. I verified that this gets you Vim 7.1 now: aap -f http://www.a-a-p.org/vim/main.aap CVS=no Using CVS already worked (didn't verify this...): aap -f http://www.a-a-p.org/vim/main.aap Or, if you used aap before, it's really simple: aap update -- hundred-and-one symptoms of being an internet addict: 122. You ask if the Netaholics Anonymous t-shirt you ordered can be sent to you via e-mail. /// Bram Moolenaar -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- http://www.Moolenaar.net \\\ ///sponsor Vim, vote for features -- http://www.Vim.org/sponsor/ \\\ \\\download, build and distribute -- http://www.A-A-P.org/// \\\help me help AIDS victims -- http://ICCF-Holland.org///
Re: Vim 7.1 and aap?
Richard van der Leeden wrote: > Currently using AAP is still downloading and installing verison 7.0 (and all > the patches). Will this be updated to load 7.1 instead? It's near the top of my todo list now. > I have altered my local copy of main.aap to get 7.1 (and change the latest > patch number to 000) which seems to work fine. Yeah, that should be all. Using CVS it should already work. -- hundred-and-one symptoms of being an internet addict: 121. You ask for e-mail adresses instead of telephone numbers. /// Bram Moolenaar -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- http://www.Moolenaar.net \\\ ///sponsor Vim, vote for features -- http://www.Vim.org/sponsor/ \\\ \\\download, build and distribute -- http://www.A-A-P.org/// \\\help me help AIDS victims -- http://ICCF-Holland.org///
Re: vim 7.1?
Ian Tegebo wrote: [...] Is the most updated TODO list for bug fixes and features "vim -c ':help todo.txt'" on a fresh build? The most updated TODO list is the latest http://ftp.vim.org/pub/vim/runtime/doc/todo.txt It is one of the most frequently modified helpfiles, and, like all runtime files, its changes are usually _not_ reflected in the patches. You've got to update your runtimes separately via ftp, rsync, cvs, svn or aap. Best regards, Tony. -- USER, n.: The word computer professionals use when they mean "idiot." -- Dave Barry, "Claw Your Way to the Top"
Re: vim 7.1?
On 4/28/07, Bram Moolenaar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Ian Tegebo wrote: > On 4/27/07, Bram Moolenaar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Jonathan Smith wrote: > > > > > With the insane number of patches collecting against 7.0, and > > > presumably the new features accumulating in the devel tree, is anyone > > > thinking about when a 7.1 release might be made? > > > > Yeah, it's about time for Vim 7.1. Unfortunately I haven't found a good > > moment to make a new release. And I don't see it happening in the > > coming weeks either... > > Would it be possible for people to help make new releases? You can certainly help fixing bugs. There is about a hundred of them at the top of the todo list. Is the most updated TODO list for bug fixes and features "vim -c ':help todo.txt'" on a fresh build? -- Ian Tegebo
Re: vim 7.1?
Ian Tegebo wrote: > On 4/27/07, Bram Moolenaar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Jonathan Smith wrote: > > > > > With the insane number of patches collecting against 7.0, and > > > presumably the new features accumulating in the devel tree, is anyone > > > thinking about when a 7.1 release might be made? > > > > Yeah, it's about time for Vim 7.1. Unfortunately I haven't found a good > > moment to make a new release. And I don't see it happening in the > > coming weeks either... > > Would it be possible for people to help make new releases? You can certainly help fixing bugs. There is about a hundred of them at the top of the todo list. I first thought to fix them all before making a 7.1, but since the list only appears to get longer I might drop that idea. -- How To Keep A Healthy Level Of Insanity: 9. As often as possible, skip rather than walk. /// Bram Moolenaar -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- http://www.Moolenaar.net \\\ ///sponsor Vim, vote for features -- http://www.Vim.org/sponsor/ \\\ \\\download, build and distribute -- http://www.A-A-P.org/// \\\help me help AIDS victims -- http://ICCF-Holland.org///
Re: vim 7.1?
On 4/27/07, Bram Moolenaar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Jonathan Smith wrote: > With the insane number of patches collecting against 7.0, and > presumably the new features accumulating in the devel tree, is anyone > thinking about when a 7.1 release might be made? Yeah, it's about time for Vim 7.1. Unfortunately I haven't found a good moment to make a new release. And I don't see it happening in the coming weeks either... Would it be possible for people to help make new releases? -- Ian Tegebo
Re: vim 7.1?
Jonathan Smith wrote: > With the insane number of patches collecting against 7.0, and > presumably the new features accumulating in the devel tree, is anyone > thinking about when a 7.1 release might be made? Yeah, it's about time for Vim 7.1. Unfortunately I haven't found a good moment to make a new release. And I don't see it happening in the coming weeks either... However, the number of patches is not insane, nor are the new features waiting in some development tree. It will be just Vim 7.0 with all patches included and updated runtime files. -- How To Keep A Healthy Level Of Insanity: 4. Put your garbage can on your desk and label it "in". /// Bram Moolenaar -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- http://www.Moolenaar.net \\\ ///sponsor Vim, vote for features -- http://www.Vim.org/sponsor/ \\\ \\\download, build and distribute -- http://www.A-A-P.org/// \\\help me help AIDS victims -- http://ICCF-Holland.org///
Re: vim 7.1?
The svn tree has all patches already inside, it does not matter how many patches are there. You just checkout and build. It's not that you need to download baseline and then 222 patches, no. Yakov On 4/27/07, Jonathan Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: With the insane number of patches collecting against 7.0, and presumably the new features accumulating in the devel tree, is anyone thinking about when a 7.1 release might be made? -smithj
Re: vim 7.1?
Nikolai Weibull wrote: On 4/27/07, A.J.Mechelynck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Nikolai Weibull wrote: > On 4/27/07, Jonathan Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> A.J.Mechelynck wrote: > >> > - Insane? All is relative. We're only at 7.0.233 as of today. FYI, Vim >> > 6.2 went to 532 patches, see http://ftp.vim.org/pub/vim/patches/ > >> Release early, release often :) > Isn't that what's being done? We're at 7.0.233. That means that > there's been 233 releases since 7.0. Of course, it all depends on how > you define release. These 233 "releases" are incremental and source-only. (Steve Hall's precompiled installers for Windows are compiled "in an officially supported way" from "official sources" yet they are still "unofficial".) Yes, I know, but the point is that Bram doesn't keep the changes to himself until he releases 7.1. The latest full official release with binaries was 7.0.000. To avail yourself (as I do) of any of these 233 patchlevels to date (for instance, on Linux), you have to, either: [...] Or let your package system do it for you, as on Gentoo. Thanks Gentoo! :-) nikolai My package system does it too, but never fast enough for my taste. That's how I have two versions of Vim here: /bin/vim (big version without GUI) 7.0.146, compiled by http://www.suse.de/ /usr/local/bin/vim (huge version with GTK2-Gnome GUI) 7.0.233, compiled by [EMAIL PROTECTED] (which includes the latest patches published last night). The latter comes of course first in the $PATH. Best regards, Tony. -- Spark's Sixth Rule for Managers: If a subordinate asks you a pertinent question, look at him as if he had lost his senses. When he looks down, paraphrase the question back at him.
Re: vim 7.1?
On 4/27/07, A.J.Mechelynck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Nikolai Weibull wrote: > On 4/27/07, Jonathan Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> A.J.Mechelynck wrote: > >> > - Insane? All is relative. We're only at 7.0.233 as of today. FYI, Vim >> > 6.2 went to 532 patches, see http://ftp.vim.org/pub/vim/patches/ > >> Release early, release often :) > Isn't that what's being done? We're at 7.0.233. That means that > there's been 233 releases since 7.0. Of course, it all depends on how > you define release. These 233 "releases" are incremental and source-only. (Steve Hall's precompiled installers for Windows are compiled "in an officially supported way" from "official sources" yet they are still "unofficial".) Yes, I know, but the point is that Bram doesn't keep the changes to himself until he releases 7.1. The latest full official release with binaries was 7.0.000. To avail yourself (as I do) of any of these 233 patchlevels to date (for instance, on Linux), you have to, either: [...] Or let your package system do it for you, as on Gentoo. Thanks Gentoo! :-) nikolai
Re: vim 7.1?
Nikolai Weibull wrote: On 4/27/07, Jonathan Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: A.J.Mechelynck wrote: > - Insane? All is relative. We're only at 7.0.233 as of today. FYI, Vim > 6.2 went to 532 patches, see http://ftp.vim.org/pub/vim/patches/ Release early, release often :) Isn't that what's being done? We're at 7.0.233. That means that there's been 233 releases since 7.0. Of course, it all depends on how you define release. nikolai These 233 "releases" are incremental and source-only. (Steve Hall's precompiled installers for Windows are compiled "in an officially supported way" from "official sources" yet they are still "unofficial".) The latest full official release with binaries was 7.0.000. To avail yourself (as I do) of any of these 233 patchlevels to date (for instance, on Linux), you have to, either: - download the current source from CVS or SVN, or - download the 7.0.000 source plus all 233 patches (there are mega- or rather hecto-patches for 001-100 and 101-200), and apply the patches in ascending order - in either case: make sure you also have the latest runtimes, most of whose updates are not reflected in the patches - ...and compile your own Vim. Happily, with the make utility and the Makefiles included in the source distribution, compiling one's own is not really a big deal. Best regards, Tony. -- hundred-and-one symptoms of being an internet addict: 202. You're amazed to find out Spam is a food.
Re: vim 7.1?
On 4/27/07, Jonathan Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: A.J.Mechelynck wrote: > - Insane? All is relative. We're only at 7.0.233 as of today. FYI, Vim > 6.2 went to 532 patches, see http://ftp.vim.org/pub/vim/patches/ Release early, release often :) Yes, I admit that you are right. But unfortunately Vim is not developing in Bazaar's way, at least not that way currently. Vim has a very very large TODO list here: ftp://ftp.vim.org/pub/vim/runtime/doc/todo.txt I sometimes guess it would be nice to import the todo list into some tracking system such as trac, and then a lot of *submitters* could participate into the development concurrently. But sadly, most of us are not able to understand Vim's source code as clearly as Bram. I also submitted some dirty patches and Bram had to correct many mistakes for me. So there can't be more *submitters* until some of us could spend as much time as Bram. > - What devel tree? I'll believe that a 7.1 is on the rails when I see at > least an alpha. Before that, AFA-anyone-CT, there's no "devel tree". > Let's not "presume" about what we know nothing about. Hence "presume". If you had browsed the svn repository, you'll discovered that there are no "trunk", "branches", "tags" directories. So... You know what I mean... > - It's not "anyone", it's Bram Moolenaar and no-one else; and since he > now has a full-time job again, it's a small sort of miracle that he > still finds "some" time for Vim. Even if BM is the only one who can actually make a release, I'd imagine others have opinions on the matter. Anyway, I was just wondering. That's why Yzis branched out from Vim project. And then, they played so badly... -smithj
Re: vim 7.1?
On 4/27/07, Jonathan Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: A.J.Mechelynck wrote: > - Insane? All is relative. We're only at 7.0.233 as of today. FYI, Vim > 6.2 went to 532 patches, see http://ftp.vim.org/pub/vim/patches/ Release early, release often :) Isn't that what's being done? We're at 7.0.233. That means that there's been 233 releases since 7.0. Of course, it all depends on how you define release. nikolai
Re: vim 7.1?
Jonathan Smith wrote: [...] Even if BM is the only one who can actually make a release, I'd imagine others have opinions on the matter. Anyway, I was just wondering. -smithj AFAICT, the current bugs are all (or almost all) mere bugfixes. I don't feel a release is imperatively called-for (but Bram has of course the final say). On Unix-like systems (like yours and mine) compiling Vim is really no problem; yet if you absolutely want it, I can make my binaries available. I don't know, however, whether they will even load without perl, python, ruby and tcl all installed, and I think the GUI won't load without Gnome2. Best regards, Tony. -- Automobile, n.: A four-wheeled vehicle that runs up hills and down pedestrians.
Re: vim 7.1?
A.J.Mechelynck wrote: - Insane? All is relative. We're only at 7.0.233 as of today. FYI, Vim 6.2 went to 532 patches, see http://ftp.vim.org/pub/vim/patches/ Release early, release often :) - What devel tree? I'll believe that a 7.1 is on the rails when I see at least an alpha. Before that, AFA-anyone-CT, there's no "devel tree". Let's not "presume" about what we know nothing about. Hence "presume". - It's not "anyone", it's Bram Moolenaar and no-one else; and since he now has a full-time job again, it's a small sort of miracle that he still finds "some" time for Vim. Even if BM is the only one who can actually make a release, I'd imagine others have opinions on the matter. Anyway, I was just wondering. -smithj
Re: vim 7.1?
Jonathan Smith wrote: With the insane number of patches collecting against 7.0, and presumably the new features accumulating in the devel tree, is anyone thinking about when a 7.1 release might be made? -smithj - Insane? All is relative. We're only at 7.0.233 as of today. FYI, Vim 6.2 went to 532 patches, see http://ftp.vim.org/pub/vim/patches/ . - What devel tree? I'll believe that a 7.1 is on the rails when I see at least an alpha. Before that, AFA-anyone-CT, there's no "devel tree". Let's not "presume" about what we know nothing about. - It's not "anyone", it's Bram Moolenaar and no-one else; and since he now has a full-time job again, it's a small sort of miracle that he still finds "some" time for Vim. Best regards, Tony. -- There is no distinctly native American criminal class except Congress. -- Mark Twain
