[patch] minor fixes in documentation

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
10 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[patch] minor fixes in documentation

Dominique Pellé
Hi

Attached are minor fixes in Vim documentation.

PS: thanks for setting up the Mercurial repository!
It works well and it's now easier to update Vim
runtime & sources.

--
You received this message from the "vim_dev" maillist.
For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php

fix-doc.patch (7K) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [patch] minor fixes in documentation

Bram Moolenaar

Dominique Pelle wrote:

> Attached are minor fixes in Vim documentation.

Thanks, I'll include them soon.

> PS: thanks for setting up the Mercurial repository!
> It works well and it's now easier to update Vim
> runtime & sources.

It's good to hear that this works well for most people.  Still wondering
how many people would complain if I drop the CVS repository.

--
From "know your smileys":
 :-D Big smile

 /// Bram Moolenaar -- [hidden email] -- http://www.Moolenaar.net   \\\
///        sponsor Vim, vote for features -- http://www.Vim.org/sponsor/ \\\
\\\        download, build and distribute -- http://www.A-A-P.org        ///
 \\\            help me help AIDS victims -- http://ICCF-Holland.org    ///

--
You received this message from the "vim_dev" maillist.
For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [patch] minor fixes in documentation

scott-268
On Saturday 09 January 2010 08:48:53 am Bram Moolenaar wrote:

> It's good to hear that this works well for most people.  Still
>  wondering how many people would complain if I drop the CVS
>  repository.
>
one voice:  i stopped using CVS after i tried markus' git
repository with the relative number patch and never looked back

he's got the runtime in his too

unless and until that patch is adopted mainstream i'll be
sticking with git (unless markus stops maintaining it for some
reason)

sc

--
You received this message from the "vim_dev" maillist.
For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [patch] minor fixes in documentation

Ingo Karkat
On 09-Jan-2010 16:46, sc wrote:
> one voice:  i stopped using CVS after i tried markus' git
> repository with the relative number patch and never looked back
>
> he's got the runtime in his too
>
I would hope that the Mercurial repository will make it easier (i.e. no manual
import of sent patches, no separate Runtime sync) for Markus to update his Git
repo.

> unless and until that patch is adopted mainstream i'll be
> sticking with git (unless markus stops maintaining it for some
> reason)
Same here. I would really love to have at least the "relative number" patch
incorporated into Vim 7.3, if not more of these unofficial features.

-- cheers, ingo

--
You received this message from the "vim_dev" maillist.
For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [patch] minor fixes in documentation

Chris Sutcliffe-2
In reply to this post by Bram Moolenaar
> It's good to hear that this works well for most people.  Still wondering
> how many people would complain if I drop the CVS repository.

I have feeling not many will complain about the dropping of CVS.  It
seems like many different major projects are moving away from CVS in
favour of a more modern DVCS.

Chris

--
Chris Sutcliffe
http://emergedesktop.org

--
You received this message from the "vim_dev" maillist.
For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

continuation of vim mainline/extended git repos (Was Re: [patch] minor fixes in documentation)

Markus Heidelberg
In reply to this post by Ingo Karkat
Ingo Karkat, 2010-01-10:
> On 09-Jan-2010 16:46, sc wrote:
> > one voice:  i stopped using CVS after i tried markus' git
> > repository with the relative number patch and never looked back
> >
> > he's got the runtime in his too
> >
> I would hope that the Mercurial repository will make it easier (i.e. no manual
> import of sent patches, no separate Runtime sync) for Markus to update his Git
> repo.

When the Mercurial repository becomes official and Vim finally has a
proper upstream, then vim_mainline.git becomes superfluous and that's
good.
I will stop updating it then and won't change it to import from the hg
repo.

> > unless and until that patch is adopted mainstream i'll be
> > sticking with git (unless markus stops maintaining it for some
> > reason)

vim_extended.git is based on vim_mainline so it will not be continued in
the same way. One solution would be to use a tool like hg-to-git to
import the official repo into a git branch, but I guess a better
approach would be to stay close to upstream and use a hg repo for
reduced trouble and increased compatibility. I haven't used hg except
for pulling and updating by now and I guess I don't like it as much as
git, but I think it would be the best solution.

> Same here. I would really love to have at least the "relative number" patch
> incorporated into Vim 7.3, if not more of these unofficial features.

I'd like that, too.

Markus

--
You received this message from the "vim_dev" maillist.
For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: continuation of vim mainline/extended git repos (Was Re: [patch] minor fixes in documentation)

scott-268
On Saturday 16 January 2010 10:54:13 am Markus Heidelberg wrote:

> vim_extended.git is based on vim_mainline so it will not be
>  continued in the same way. One solution would be to use a
>  tool like hg-to-git to import the official repo into a git
>  branch, but I guess a better approach would be to stay close
>  to upstream and use a hg repo for reduced trouble and
>  increased compatibility. I haven't used hg except for pulling
>  and updating by now and I guess I don't like it as much as
>  git, but I think it would be the best solution.
>
so -- what -- those of us now hooked on relative numbers will use
hg to get vim mainline, then git to merge the r/n patches?  oh
lordy i'm sure to find a way to bork that up

this sounds like a good time for an impassioned plea to have
relative numbers rolled into mainstream -- please?

in the mean time i'll get mercurial installed and start reading
man pages

sc

--
You received this message from the "vim_dev" maillist.
For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: continuation of vim mainline/extended git repos (Was Re: [patch] minor fixes in documentation)

Ingo Karkat
In reply to this post by Markus Heidelberg
On 16-Jan-2010 17:54, Markus Heidelberg wrote:

> Ingo Karkat, 2010-01-10:
>> I would hope that the Mercurial repository will make it easier (i.e. no manual
>> import of sent patches, no separate Runtime sync) for Markus to update his Git
>> repo.
>
> When the Mercurial repository becomes official and Vim finally has a
> proper upstream, then vim_mainline.git becomes superfluous and that's
> good.
> I will stop updating it then and won't change it to import from the hg
> repo.
I can understand your reasoning; after all, you've volunteered your resources to
update the Git repo, and the main pain point will then be gone. OTOH, I'm afraid
some Git users won't bother switching to Mercurial and will stop updating Vim
regularly.

>>> unless and until that patch is adopted mainstream i'll be
>>> sticking with git (unless markus stops maintaining it for some
>>> reason)
>
> vim_extended.git is based on vim_mainline so it will not be continued in
> the same way. One solution would be to use a tool like hg-to-git to
> import the official repo into a git branch, but I guess a better
> approach would be to stay close to upstream and use a hg repo for
> reduced trouble and increased compatibility. I haven't used hg except
> for pulling and updating by now and I guess I don't like it as much as
> git, but I think it would be the best solution.
That's sad to hear. I can only hope that someone will offer something like
vim_extended on Mercurial. Getting experimental patches to so many interested
users had never been so easy, it would be a real loss if this went away without
replacement.

Nonetheless, I'd like to say a big thank-you to you, Markus, for providing the
Git repositories! Through them, I got introduced to Git (and began to really
like it!)

-- regards, ingo

--
You received this message from the "vim_dev" maillist.
For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: continuation of vim mainline/extended git repos (Was Re: [patch] minor fixes in documentation)

Markus Heidelberg
In reply to this post by scott-268
sc, 2010-01-16:

> On Saturday 16 January 2010 10:54:13 am Markus Heidelberg wrote:
>
> > vim_extended.git is based on vim_mainline so it will not be
> >  continued in the same way. One solution would be to use a
> >  tool like hg-to-git to import the official repo into a git
> >  branch, but I guess a better approach would be to stay close
> >  to upstream and use a hg repo for reduced trouble and
> >  increased compatibility. I haven't used hg except for pulling
> >  and updating by now and I guess I don't like it as much as
> >  git, but I think it would be the best solution.
> >
> so -- what -- those of us now hooked on relative numbers will use
> hg to get vim mainline, then git to merge the r/n patches?
No, like I said, using two different VCSs is suboptimal, desired is to
use hg for everything. A vim_extended hg repository could be set up.

Markus

--
You received this message from the "vim_dev" maillist.
For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: continuation of vim mainline/extended git repos (Was Re: [patch] minor fixes in documentation)

Markus Heidelberg
In reply to this post by Ingo Karkat
Ingo Karkat, 2010-01-16:

> On 16-Jan-2010 17:54, Markus Heidelberg wrote:
> > Ingo Karkat, 2010-01-10:
> >> I would hope that the Mercurial repository will make it easier (i.e. no manual
> >> import of sent patches, no separate Runtime sync) for Markus to update his Git
> >> repo.
> >
> > When the Mercurial repository becomes official and Vim finally has a
> > proper upstream, then vim_mainline.git becomes superfluous and that's
> > good.
> > I will stop updating it then and won't change it to import from the hg
> > repo.
>
> I can understand your reasoning; after all, you've volunteered your resources to
> update the Git repo, and the main pain point will then be gone. OTOH, I'm afraid
> some Git users won't bother switching to Mercurial and will stop updating Vim
> regularly.
Using the hg repository, you don't have the delay with a second
repository. Also merging other features outside of a vim_extended.hg
project should be easy if it is managed in a hg repo based on upstream.
Patches for which it isn't worth to set up an own webpage could be
collected in vim_extended.

> >>> unless and until that patch is adopted mainstream i'll be
> >>> sticking with git (unless markus stops maintaining it for some
> >>> reason)
> >
> > vim_extended.git is based on vim_mainline so it will not be continued in
> > the same way. One solution would be to use a tool like hg-to-git to
> > import the official repo into a git branch, but I guess a better
> > approach would be to stay close to upstream and use a hg repo for
> > reduced trouble and increased compatibility. I haven't used hg except
> > for pulling and updating by now and I guess I don't like it as much as
> > git, but I think it would be the best solution.
>
> That's sad to hear. I can only hope that someone will offer something like
> vim_extended on Mercurial. Getting experimental patches to so many interested
> users had never been so easy, it would be a real loss if this went away without
> replacement.
Unless someone beats me to it, maybe I will look into it and set
something up. After all I have a patch myself that I want to keep alive
(of course what I really want is to have it in upstream).

Markus

--
You received this message from the "vim_dev" maillist.
For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php