Unless a distribution offers a choice for the default editor, it will be
impossible to satisfy everyone.
I don't despise nano nor emacs, I simply don't use them, and I'm sure I'll
never will. So nano or emacs would be very bad choices for me.
The best choice is to let the user choose it's own default editor.





2015-07-16 10:32 GMT+02:00 Oz Tiram <oz.tiram@???>:

> I am an avid VIM user, and I despise VI.
>
> If devuan is about choice you can always apt-get install vim-minimal after
> the default install.
>
> Nano is a better choice for anyone, because it is not as large as VIM.
> Emacs is also not intuitive.
>
>
> I see no real obvious reason to default to vi instead of nano except
> that it was the default editor in some unix platform (and still is in some
> other).
>
> Nano, is not VI, but it's still in the spirit. A small unix tool that does
> one thing
> good, and excel at it. It is a simple and intuitive editor.
>
> VIM is a wonderful IDE, scripting language, terminal multiplexer and to a
> certain
> degree a religion too ([I worship it too][1]). This are all wonderful
> traits, but not
> necessarily a trait for a default installation.
>
> These are my two cents.
>
> Oz
>
> [1] A collection of my writings about VIM
> http://oz123.github.io/tags/vim/
>
> --
>
>
> ---
>
> Imagine there's no countries
> it isn't hard to do
> Nothing to kill or die for
> And no religion too
> Imagine all the people
> Living life in peace
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Dng mailing list
> Dng@???
> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
>
>