cvs commit: src/release/scripts print-cdrom-packages.sh

[Richard Coleman]

Scott Long wrote:

>> Why isn't it "lite"?
>>     -rw-r--r--  1 portmgr  archive       2M Nov 18 01:09 
>> vim-lite-6.2.139.tbz
>>
>> Lets look at the Emacs editors you left behind:
>>     -rw-r--r--  1 portmgr  archive       11M Nov 21 17:21 emacs-21.3.tbz
>>
>> I predict you will become very unpopular for this commit.
>> Please remove Emacs instead.
>>
> 
> I think that you failed to see that there was both 'vim' and 'vim-lite'.
> In the interest of saving space, one needed to go.  I'm happy to discuss
> which of the two is more appropriate, but I'm adamant that I will remain
> silent on an emacs v. vi debate.

Actually, leaving vim-lite rather than vim may be preferable.  Those who 
really want gvim, or vim compiled with their favorite interpreter built 
in (perl, python, tcl, whatever) will want to recompile anyways.  And 
the default build for vim uses the GTK1 libraries, and that's getting 
kinda dated.

But, it's not a bad deal, one way or the other.  Just a suggestion.

Richard Coleman
richardcoleman at mindspring.com