| 1 |
On Sun, Sep 7, 2014 at 3:49 PM, Joshua Kinard <kumba@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> IMHO, I think @system should maintain at least one editor and include some |
| 3 |
> kind of networking diagnostic package. |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
Why is it important that we not be able to parallel build an editor? |
| 6 |
Is it such a frequent build-time dependency that we wouldn't want to |
| 7 |
specify it? It is essential that we make it extra-hard for a user to |
| 8 |
uninstall their last editor, since it is impossible to install an |
| 9 |
editor without an editor already present? |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
I can't imagine using a system without an editor. I can't imagine |
| 12 |
using a system without screen/tmux either. That doesn't mean that |
| 13 |
either belongs in the system set. I'd be all for keeping it in the |
| 14 |
stage3, on the install CDs, and having it in the default @world |
| 15 |
though. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
This is my concern with @system. Stuff gets stuck in there for the |
| 18 |
noblest of intentions, but it is the wrong solution to the problems it |
| 19 |
is being used to solve. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
-- |
| 22 |
Rich |
Archives