Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Vim arch repository.

[David Brown]

On Sat, Sep 13, 2003 at 03:39:49PM +0900, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
> >>>>> "David" == David Brown <address@hidden> writes:
> 
>     David> A category of vim makes sense.
> 
> Please think carefully about that.  I came to the opposite conclusion
> about XEmacs vs GNU Emacs.  I don't see any hope for full merge of the
> projects in the short to medium term.  But there's enough shared code,
> and there could be more, that having xemacs and gnu-emacs branches of
> one emacs category makes sense.
> 
> vim may very well be farther diverged from the other vi family
> members, so I'm just recommending careful thought, not taking a position.

Vim shares no code with any other implementation of vi.  As I'm going
through earlier versions of vim, I would almost say that vim doesn't
really share much code with early versions of itself.

Vim is not a fork off of anything.  It is a completely fresh project.

Progress so far: I've imported historical mainlines (no patches) up
until 5.8, and then the patches on 5.8.001
(vim--bram--5.8--versionfix-1) to 5.8.009
(vim--bram--5.8--versionfix-9).

Next is 6.0 which has many more ports.

One other question.  Do you think there is much benefit in committing
the history of Bram's pre-releases?  I can try to piece together their
history, but I don't know how important it is to do to the past.

Also, I'm going to announce my work on this in the vim mailing list.

Dave