Re: [Nano-devel] how about merge with alpine-pico?

[Zhang Weiwu]

Chris Allegretta wrote:
> It's not like the PINE developers could not reimplement what nano was 
> doing in the equivalent method for their own editor; they chose not to 
> do so.  I think there is likely a bigger issue here.  Do talk to the 
> alpine team, but I would not expect a sudden 'all changes welcome' 
> attitude in the response .  U of W was notorious for ignoring patches 
> and end user feature requests, and just changing the license will not 
> change that.  Maybe that's change along with the license; I certainly 
> hope it has.
>   
> Anyway, I think the PINE and nano project havs had, and still do have 
> different end goals for their software.  PINE aims to be an MUA (and 
> succeeds at that) and it happens to have a text editor which goes along 
> with it.  Nano's end to end goal is to be a text editor with a hopefully
> broader appear due to its feature set.  I think both are successes, and 
> merging may not make sense in either the short or long term.
>
> In closing, if the license issue could be resolved, and somehow 
> codebases cold be merged or (even more unlikely) if U of W wanted to 
> throw out pico and maintain and integrate nano, I think there might be 
> some interest in assisting with that project.  But I'm not holding my 
> breath, 8+ years of waiting will do that for you :)
Thanks for still visiting the list and give suggestions and commends
(after so many years).

As you described there are reasons not to become alpine and no interest
to move to alpine, which I understood. I am not an user with ambition to
do something around any C source code, but I see both nano and pine
development almost stalled for years, and if alpine is moving, I hope
nano can move more lively too, in one way or another. Another option is
to convince alpine to depend on nano. An MUA can include an editor on
their own but can also spend more resource to do their own work better
and simply depend on something else (a.k.a. nano) when it can. If this
happen, alpine users might like to enhance nano too for their own needs;
and as said, nano is already better in functionality than pico. This is
a chance because alpine is another product, user might accept something
different better.

-- 
Real Softservice

Huateng Tower, Unit 1788
Jia 302 3rd area of Jinsong, Chao Yang

Tel: +86 (10) 8773 0650 ext 603
Mobile: 135 9950 2413
http://www.realss.com