New proposed Strategy Document - Text Editor discussion

[Shuhao Wu]

+1

Mousepad is perfectly suitable for basic tasks that users will have.
Some performance edge cases for mousepad is worrisome (such as a
minified JS file with syntax highlighting on will cause issues), but
that is largely just nitpick.

One problem potentially with mousepad is that the development is fairly
stagnant. I tried to push a patch out to it but it has been sitting in
bugzilla for months. However, that said, I still think Mousepad is the
perfect editor to bundle as a default.

Shuhao

On 11/07/2013 09:49 AM, Pasi Lallinaho wrote:
> I agree this got off track. Here's what I think:
> 
> Instead of discussing the target audience, we should keep in mind what
> the usage for an application, in this case, Mousepad, is.
> 
> From my point of view, Mousepad is to provide a simple text editor to
> edit some configuration files and possibly some simple text files. The
> newest Mousepad version does support 1) tabs 2) syntax highlighting 3)
> color schemes (and there has been support for text wrapping and line
> numbers for a long time). These alone make Mousepad even a bit
> superfluous for the reason and usecase we are including Mousepad.
> 
> If you need features that Mousepad do not have, you probably want to
> install a preferred editor anyway. It is likely that there will be no
> consensus if we start arguing over which advanced editor is "the best".
> Ultimately, I don't think Xubuntu lacks at all if we don't ship such editor.
> 
> Cheers,
> Pasi
> 
> P.S. Yes, the Strategy Document should say Mousepad, not Leafpad.
> 
> On 07/11/13 14:58, Richard Elkins wrote:
>> I think that the discussion got off track.  A good engineer's editor probably supports any language - it does for me.  
>>
>> The choice of default text editor should be based on the target audience for the release which has evolved since the first 'buntu, quite
>> a bit.  Who is the target audience nowadays?  Or, should we default in one for simple note-padding and one with a lot of engineering capabilities?
>>
>> Keep in mind that they are both low on dependencies, relative to other packages.
>>
>> On 11/07/2013 05:55 AM, Eero Tamminen wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On keskiviikko 06 marraskuu 2013, Joshua O'Leary wrote:
>>>> It mentions C++ programs as being unsuitable, but this is clearly not the
>>>> case as core components (such as apt and software-centre, and now even
>>>> gcc) are coded in C++
>>> Also all browsers use C++, from Dillo to Firefox
>>> (Gecko and Webkit HTML engines are coded in C++,
>>> even if the GUI toolkit wouldn't use C++).
>>>
>>>
>>> 	- Eero
>>>
>>
>>
>>
> 
> 
> 
>