Re: RFC: fewer vim variants

2003-09-07 Thread Norbert Tretkowski
* Marcelo E. Magallon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > At the moment: > > * Perl is lost (that threaded thing) As one of the new Co-Maintainers, I'm going to upload the package from http://p.d.o/~nobse/vim/ to experimental this evening. The perl issue is fixed in this package. > * Can't ac

Re: RFC: fewer vim variants

2003-09-07 Thread Marcelo E. Magallon
Hi Luca, sorry about the Cc, but eye-balling -devel didn't reveal much activity from you, so I'm not sure if you track the list. M-F-T is set to d-d. > I propose to restructure the vim package so that it builds fewer vim > variants. > > I propose to have only the following: > vim (aka

Re: RFC: fewer vim variants

2003-06-22 Thread Adrian 'Dagurashibanipal' von Bidder
On Sunday 15 June 2003 17:39, Marc Wilson wrote: > On Sun, Jun 15, 2003 at 11:23:34AM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: > > What about a version _with_ all non-threaded interpreters, but _without_ > > gtk2/kde support? > > That would be console Vim, from either package. The GUI doesn't add so > muc

Re: RFC: fewer vim variants

2003-06-16 Thread José Fonseca
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Luca Filipozzi wrote: > Hello people, > > I propose to restructure the vim package so that it builds fewer vim > variants. > > I propose to have only the following: > vim (aka vim-tiny; no interpreters, no docs) > kvim (including all non-threaded interpreters;

Re: RFC: fewer vim variants

2003-06-16 Thread Jörgen Hägg
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you write: > Hello people, > > I propose to restructure the vim package so that it builds fewer vim > variants. > > I propose to have only the following: > vim (aka vim-tiny; no interpreters, no docs) > kvim (including all non-threaded interpreters; kde support