While I agree with the idea of allowing some flexibility in -meta package choices, vim isn't a good example on which to stake a case. Rolf, what you really want to do is install the editor of your choice, and then modify the /usr/bin/editor alternative to point to it; that, more than anything else, makes it the system's "official" editor. vim is defensible as a requirement given that it has a minimal footprint, and that vi has long been the one editor you can count on being installed on whatever Unix/Linux system you encounter. (I prefer nano myself, but I've no real reason to begrudge the presence of vi on my system.)
Instead of vim, I would point to gdm as a motivation---see bug 552858. gdm is currently a problem in the xubuntu-desktop package because it depends on significant chunks of GNOME (when nothing else in the metapackage does), so there is a large practical benefit to allowing alternatives there. (Of course, the real fix would be for xubuntu-desktop to switch to a different display manager, and revert to requiring it. But there's currently no clear idea on how this will happen.) -- depend on an editor instead of hard-wiring vim https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/455153 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
