Bug 215652

I've added it to the console tools pattern as suggested, and therefore it's not installed by default now.

I would also point out that nano should be added to the base system.

Especially new users can not work with vim, ex and ed and also joe is not so easy for new users.

Putting nano in the console tools pattern does not really help new users because it's not installed by default anyway. nano is an easy editor which is included in the default installations of many distributions like Debian und Gentoo. 

reopening for 10.3

Over to PM, who need to decide on the default console editor :)

I'd second comment #3, which refers to other distributions like Debian and Gentoo, who ship nano as their default editor.

Nice. I was considering reopening it myself. But I figured it would be a bit troll'ish to reopen my own report ;-)

Let me point out that apart from being much easier to use Nano should also take up slightly less space than vim. Might help a little in trimming down the basesystem.

Agreed, nano much more better fits the role of the default simple lightweight text editor. Vim is much more complicated.

I suggest to ask on the opensuse-factory for some short feedback.

So, the proposal is to use nano instead of both vim and joe?

how about s,joe,nano,?

although Im from "the Cult of vim" :-)  I think nano is the best choice for noobs, it is easy to use, small and all other major distros have it by default, I have seen many noobs in action over the years and almost all of them have serious issues with command line editors. vim is hard for them and "ed" well.. is just plain obscure.

Of course I support the idea to add "nano" to the base system. "joe" could be removed from the base system, if "nano" is installed.

But I'm strictly against removing "vi" from the base system. This would break nearly many Linux/UNIX tutorials. I could not teach my students, that "vi" is the only text editor, which is part of _every_ UNIX system, if this is not true for some popular systems like openSUSE. I think, "vi" should stay part of the openSUSE base system. If it takes too much disk space, it's possible to use a "vi" editor with lower disk space usage. For instance some distributions use "nvi" (Debian) or "vim-minimal" in the base system.

I think, one problem with "nano" is, that it uses line wrapping by default. That's why "nano -w" should be used for configuration files. May be, the default line wrapping should be disabled in a /etc/nanorc file. 

Michl, any decision? Or shall we let an IRC meeting decide? ;-)

To stay consistent with the manuals, I'd propose to keep vi for now. CLOSING WONTFIX.

(In reply to comment #13 from Christoph Thiel)
> To stay consistent with the manuals, I'd propose to keep vi for now. CLOSING
> WONTFIX.

That is a terrible excuse to wontfix. Manuals exist for the purpose of explaining how things do work, not for dictating how things should work. Vi is a prime example of a reason to not use Linux at all, why Linux is considered suitable mostly for computer geeks.

As said in the meeting this is not about replacing vim, or about the CD only.

> That is a terrible excuse to wontfix.

it is not an excuse.

> Manuals exist for the purpose of
> explaining how things do work, not for dictating how things should work. 

No, there are several standards around *unix like systems that **requires** the Vi 
Editor present by default.

>Vi is
> a prime example of a reason to not use Linux at all, why Linux is considered
> suitable mostly for computer geeks.

I agree that vi is not for everyone nor "noob^Wuser friendly" but there is no reason why nano cannot be there as well. 

Cthiel, in the status meeting you said that you'd include nano on 1-cds if there was room on RC1.

But joe is still on the DVD5 for beta3.. 

So what is the plan here? 

1-CD: vi(m) + possibly nano if there's 400 kb available on RC1.

DVD5: vi(m) + joe + nano? or vi(m) + joe only?

Alright, checking the current size of the 1-CD it's pretty unlikely that we will be able to add nano to it on RC1.

On DVD5 we already added nano.