Re: alternatives and priorities

Wouter Verhelst writes ("alternatives and priorities"): > Fixing this wasn't very hard, but it made me consider why we let a > maintainer decide what the alternative priority of an editor would be. I have a suggestion: how about we make it a rule that to provide a new alter

Re: alternatives and priorities

[George Danchev] > or some hosts have popularity-contest installed from pure upstream sources > instead from a popularity-contest debian package, thus don't have it > registered with the dpkg db. That would seriously surprise me, as popularity-contest only is distributed as a Debian package, an

Re: alternatives and priorities

On Tue, May 23, 2006 at 04:55:52PM +0900, Miles Bader wrote: > Wouter Verhelst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > If you have a look at the order of the by_vote numbers for editors, > > you'll see that vim, not nvi or nano, is at the top. > > A list like this only seems meaningful if the entries are

Re: alternatives and priorities

Wouter Verhelst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > If you have a look at the order of the by_vote numbers for editors, > you'll see that vim, not nvi or nano, is at the top. A list like this only seems meaningful if the entries are fairly consistent with each other. For instance, if you have packages

Re: alternatives and priorities

On Mon, May 22, 2006 at 10:42:26PM -0300, Maximiliano Curia wrote: > On Sunday 21 May 2006 16:31, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > > > You would end up with nvi or nano as editors, since they are installed by > > > default. Probably more as viewer and so on. > > > Which is bad why? > > What I meant was t

Re: alternatives and priorities

On Fri, May 19, 2006 at 03:46:28PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > That's not an issue. First, ed doesn't install an alternatives for > "editor". Second, there's also 'by_vote', which puts vim on top. Which is an excellent demonstration of "why we should not use popcon to decide alternatives prio

Re: alternatives and priorities

On Sunday 21 May 2006 16:31, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > > You would end up with nvi or nano as editors, since they are installed by > > default. Probably more as viewer and so on. > Which is bad why? What I meant was that you would have a high number of installations for the packages that are inst

Re: alternatives and priorities

Goswin von Brederlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Similary any vi extension should top vi itself. Also zile, emacs, > xemacs build kind of a progression. "Kind of progression"?? -Miles -- Somebody has to do something, and it's just incredibly pathetic that it has to be us. -- Jerry Garcia --

Re: alternatives and priorities

On Sunday 21 May 2006 22:48, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote: --cut-- > Heck, even the installation number have problems. Just check out > http://qa.debian.org/developer.php?popcon=popularity-contest>, > showing that 99.72% of the machines reporting to popcon have popcon > installed. I believe that whe

Re: alternatives and priorities

[Wouter Verhelst] > Which, I'm sure, is important for popcon maintainers; however, I > don't think it is very relevant in this discussion (unless you can > point me towards an editor that is implemented as a library ;-) The problem do not only affect libraries. There are other packages (with user

Re: alternatives and priorities

On Fri, May 19, 2006 at 03:23:09PM -0300, Maximiliano Curia wrote: > On Friday 19 May 2006 10:25, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > > So, instead of using static feature lists to define an application's > > priority with which it would be configured in the alternatives system, > > why not use popcon data to

Re: alternatives and priorities

On Fri, May 19, 2006 at 09:51:58PM +0200, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote: > [Gregor Herrmann] > > If you look at by_vote [0] the situation is different: > > http://popcon.debian.org/main/editors/by_vote > > > > [0] which seems more relevant to me: > > # is the number of people who installed this package

Re: alternatives and priorities

Hello! On Fri, 19 May 2006 08:46:28 -0500, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > On Fri, May 19, 2006 at 02:28:30PM +0100, Jon Dowland wrote: >> At 1148052328 past the epoch, Wouter Verhelst wrote: >> > Using popcon would ensure that the applications which most >> > people prefer would be the default; this i

Re: alternatives and priorities

[Gregor Herrmann] > If you look at by_vote [0] the situation is different: > http://popcon.debian.org/main/editors/by_vote > > [0] which seems more relevant to me: > # is the number of people who installed this package; > # is the number of people who use this package regularly; Note, the popcon

Re: alternatives and priorities

On Friday 19 May 2006 10:25, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > Today, after upgrading my system, suddenly mcedit became the default > editor, rather than vim as I expected it. Investigating showed that some > funny guy decided that mcedit could use a priority of 100, whereas vim > had fallen back to 60 sinc

Re: alternatives and priorities

On Fri, May 19, 2006 at 03:25:28PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > Today, after upgrading my system, suddenly mcedit became the default > editor, rather than vim as I expected it. Investigating showed that some > funny guy decided that mcedit could use a priority of 100, whereas vim > had fallen ba

Re: alternatives and priorities

On Fri, May 19, 2006 at 03:41:12PM +0200, Steinar H. Gunderson wrote: > On Fri, May 19, 2006 at 03:25:28PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > > Fixing this wasn't very hard, but it made me consider why we let a > > maintainer decide what the alternative priority of an editor would be. > Mm -- I always

Re: alternatives and priorities

At 1148053588 past the epoch, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > That's not an issue. First, ed doesn't install an alternatives for > "editor". Ah. Of course :) Sheepish, -- Jon Dowland http://alcopop.org/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact

Re: alternatives and priorities

"Steinar H. Gunderson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Fri, May 19, 2006 at 03:25:28PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote: >> Fixing this wasn't very hard, but it made me consider why we let a >> maintainer decide what the alternative priority of an editor would be. > > Mm -- I always wondered why xfce

Re: alternatives and priorities

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Jon Dowland wrote: > At 1148052328 past the epoch, Wouter Verhelst wrote: >> Using popcon would ensure that the applications which most people >> prefer would be the default; this is a fair and objective criterion. >> >> Thoughts? > > Interesting id

Re: alternatives and priorities

On Fri, May 19, 2006 at 02:28:30PM +0100, Jon Dowland wrote: > > Using popcon would ensure that the applications which most people > > prefer would be the default; this is a fair and objective criterion. > Interesting idea, but by my reckoning that would make "ed" the default > editor for most p

Re: alternatives and priorities

On Fri, May 19, 2006 at 02:28:30PM +0100, Jon Dowland wrote: > At 1148052328 past the epoch, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > > Using popcon would ensure that the applications which most people > > prefer would be the default; this is a fair and objective criterion. > > > > Thoughts? > > Interesting id

Re: alternatives and priorities

On Fri, May 19, 2006 at 03:25:28PM +0200, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > Fixing this wasn't very hard, but it made me consider why we let a > maintainer decide what the alternative priority of an editor would be. Mm -- I always wondered why xfce-session-manager had a priority over gnome-session-manager

Re: alternatives and priorities

At 1148048910 past the epoch, Jon Dowland wrote: > Interesting idea, but by my reckoning that would make "ed" the default > editor for most people, which I don't think is a good idea: > Eek. Of course if you go by "vote", then vim or nvi tr

Re: alternatives and priorities

At 1148052328 past the epoch, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > Using popcon would ensure that the applications which most people > prefer would be the default; this is a fair and objective criterion. > > Thoughts? Interesting idea, but by my reckoning that would make "ed" the default editor for most pe

alternatives and priorities

Hi, Today, after upgrading my system, suddenly mcedit became the default editor, rather than vim as I expected it. Investigating showed that some funny guy decided that mcedit could use a priority of 100, whereas vim had fallen back to 60 since the latest upgrade. Fixing this wasn't very hard, bu