Re: [gtk-list] Re: vi bindings for text widgets

[Pat Rogan <rogan lycos com>]

George wrote:
> 
> On Tue, Jul 07, 1998 at 07:35:26PM -0400, Pat Rogan wrote:
> > What if there was one big GTK_EDIT_MODE variable in the ~/.gtk file that
> > had exactly 3 options?
> >
> >   emacs
> >   vi
> >   windoz
> >
> > Then EVERYBODY'S happy.  Those who want to use something that they are
> > familiar with can, and those who are afraid of letting the user do
> > things the way they want get to limit the user's choices to "3".
> 
> why should we tell the user what to do ... I don't get that logic ...

I get it, but don't agree with it.  This exampe was a compromise for the
one person who didn't think the user should have any say in how his
environment works.  (BTW: you wree supposed to be HAPPY! :)

I basically do agree with George here.  This is UNIX.  UNIX always lets
you do what you want, how you want to do it.  There's also no reason we
can't hand hold newbies (as above), and let the rest configure their
little hearts out.  With unix the customer is always right.  With
windows, Microsoft is always "right" (so to speak).  I don't believe the
goal here is to turn unix into wondoz, but i might be mistaken.

In any case, some of you seem to forget that there will probably be a
version 1, version 2, version 3... of this particular project.  Just
porting the generalized code from Amulet will be an accomplishment. 
Getting it to read in a diffenent canned binding set will be another. 
Getting it to read in a binding set from a config file will be a third. 
These don't all have to happen at once, and each stage will be somewhat
better than what we have now.

Can someone look at how Amulet handles this and let me know if this is
what you want? (see link from previous email).

~p@

-- 
Patrick Rogan
-----------------------------------
Systems Engineer

Lycos, Inc.
1 Oxford Centre
301 Grant Street, Suite 525
Pittsburgh, PA   15219-1408