From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=)
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add nvi
Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2014 14:18:59 +0200
Message-ID: <87d2bep64s.fsf@gnu.org>
References: <54047591.9080902@gmail.com> <5405975D.70604@gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Return-path: <guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:44650)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <ludo@gnu.org>) id 1XOn3H-0002Qf-G2
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 02 Sep 2014 08:19:20 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <ludo@gnu.org>) id 1XOn38-0003Df-EA
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 02 Sep 2014 08:19:11 -0400
Received: from hera.aquilenet.fr ([2a01:474::1]:55470)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <ludo@gnu.org>)
	id 1XOn38-0003DV-7K
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 02 Sep 2014 08:19:02 -0400
In-Reply-To: <5405975D.70604@gmail.com> (Cyril Roelandt's message of "Tue, 02
	Sep 2014 12:09:33 +0200")
List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution."
	<guix-devel.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/guix-devel>,
	<mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:guix-devel@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guix-devel>,
	<mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Sender: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
To: Cyril Roelandt <tipecaml@gmail.com>
Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org

Cyril Roelandt <tipecaml@gmail.com> skribis:

> On 09/01/2014 03:33 PM, Marek Benc wrote:
>> Disregard my previous email, I figured it out.
>>=20
>> Here is my favorite text editor. This is my first package, so I'm sorry=
=20
>> if I messed up somewhere.
>> The formatting is probably bad, but every package seemed to be formatted=
=20
>> slightly differently, so I don't know.
>>=20
>> --- a/gnu/packages/nvi.scm    2014-09-01 15:22:45.219850258 +0200
>
> Maybe we should have all vi-like editors in one file. We currently have
> vim in gnu/packages/vim.scm, maybe we should have both nvi and vim in
> gnu/packages/vi.scm, WDYT ?

Yes, definitely.  We can do this either before or after adding nvi.

Ludo=E2=80=99.