On Fri, Dec 4, 2020 at 9:01 AM Simo Sorce <s...@redhat.com> wrote: > > On Thu, 2020-12-03 at 15:41 -0500, Ben Cotton wrote: > > On Thu, Dec 3, 2020 at 3:32 PM Tom Hughes via devel > > <devel@lists.fedoraproject.org> wrote: > > > What exactly does "change the default on upgrade" actually mean > > > here? Making nano-default-editor a dependency of something else > > > that people are likely to have installed? Or adding something to > > > some sort of post install script for system-upgrade that installs > > > that package? > > > > From the BZ Miro linked to in the start of this thread: > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1896707#c12 > > > dnf system-upgrade also upgrades groups, so nano-default-editor gets > > > installed on system upgrades > > > If I accept our argument then how do I choose not to accept your > > > opinion and "explicitly override" this choice? > > > > Also from that bug: > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1896707#c13 > > > "dnf remove nano-default-editor". Alternatively, you can set "export > > > EDITOR=vim" in your ~/.bash_profile > > > Shouldn't we just set export EDITOR=nano in the default profile and leave > existing users alone? > > I cannot see how change a *user default* vs a system default, can *ever* be > acceptable. >
The intent is to make it the system-wide default when the user has no setting. If the user has a setting in their profile, then that is respected, regardless of whether the package is installed or not. -- 真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth! _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
