Roland Eggner wrote: > Prior to dropping support for w2k please consider: > > (1) w2k is known to be the least faulty OS version released > by its vendor so far, because the phrase "based on NT" was a > lot more than just an advertising, the development history of > this OS version differed significantly from all other OS > versions of this vendor > (2) when running as kvm or qemu guest, w2k yields best > performance among all OS versions of this vendor > > For this two reasons IMHO support for w2k remains useful, > even more than a decade after release of w2k.
Bram (I assume) would prefer to support everything, and not drop Windows 2000 or anything else. However, the proposal is to start using certain features that are only available in Windows XP and later. Supporting an older system would require complex compile options and a bunch of testing. All that makes developing Vim harder and more fragile. Why would someone who does not want to upgrade their operating system want to upgrade their editor? W2k is not safe to use on the Internet, unless in a very restricted mode, and the current Vim has few bugs that matter, and has plenty of features, so upgrades should be strictly optional. John -- -- You received this message from the "vim_dev" maillist. Do not top-post! Type your reply below the text you are replying to. For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "vim_dev" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
