[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: use fcron as default scheduler in Fedora?



On Thu, Dec 11, 2008 at 05:19:44PM -0900, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
> 
> Is this a requirement on vim-minimal or just a requirement for a posix
> compliant editor to be available?

On /bin/vi. More precisely fcron has a build time check, with a 
configure flag --with-editor, that defaults to 
AC_PATH_PROG(FOUND_FCRON_EDITOR, vi. And cronie uses _PATH_VI from
paths.h. I don't think there is a posix compliance needed as all.

The posix compliance argument, is here to justify vim-minimal as 'not 
a bad choice for a default editor'. But once again if you have an idea
for a better default editor choice, just do the infrastructure, then
provide patches for packages that need a default editor and be done.

> Or let me ask it this way. Right now in the entire repository is
> vim-minimal the only editor which is being explicitly required to
> filling this fallback role? If it is, enshrine that as policy before I

Why do we need a policy here?

> get a chance to submit a package which falls back to nano. If its not
> the only editor being used as a fallback in the repository, then some
> compromise needs to be worked out so don't have people dragging in
> multiple editors to fill the fallback capacity.

I am not sure a compromise is needed. Just let the packagers do what
they prefer, in the constraints of upstream choices. If somebody is 
interested in modularizing better the default editor handling, for example 
with something built around xdg-open, or around xdg-edit no problem, I
think that all the packagers will gladly accept the change.

When pointed to it, all the packagers of packages I reviewed accepted to
use htmlview, and everybody accepted to switch to xdg-open when Ville
filled bugs with patches.

There was a thread about how to choose a default editor on the packaging 
list some time ago, I don't remember exactly what was the conclusion, 
but I pointed out that using xdg-open was dangerous, because it is not 
clear what xdg-open applie to a text file means, because it may mean 
editing it, viewing it, and maybe other action.

Of course finding out packages that need a default editor will require
some research, but I think that a mail on devel list should be enough.

There is another package which needs a default editor, grace, and we
used nedit for the lack of anything better, given that grace (and nedit) 
use Motif.

--
Pat


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]