On Mon, Jan 02, 2006 at 11:47:05AM -0600, Steve Greenland wrote: > On 23-Dec-05, 11:54 (CST), Anthony Towns <aj@azure.humbug.org.au> wrote:
> > The size of base matters a little, but it's not an "every byte is > > sacred" situation. > > Cheers, aj (base maintainer, for those playing along at home) > So, it seems that so far as Stefano (vim maintainer) and I (nvi > maintainer) are concerned, you and Joey get to make the call on this. Since > Joey initiated this thread, I think we can assume he's in favor of > the change. How say you? > If you agree with the change, do Stefano and I need to do anything > other than swap vi alternative priorities and swap important<->optional > priorities? Why swap the vi alternative priorities? -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org/
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
