don't want to sound nasty , but is anyone there using nano really ? i know it come by default in some distros but that's about it really.
[deleted]
Nano is no longer a GNU project
21–30 of 240 posts
Re: Nano is no longer a GNU project
#22don't want to sound nasty , but is anyone there using nano really ? i know it come by default in some distros but that's about it really.
Yes, it's much easier to work with than modal editors which I find clumsy and terrible. I don't use it intensively, just when I need to edit something quickly, usually in an SSH session.
Re: Nano is no longer a GNU project
#23don't want to sound nasty , but is anyone there using nano really ? i know it come by default in some distros but that's about it really.
on any server without a monitor, ofc i use nano!
Re: Nano is no longer a GNU project
#24 > > As you know, I will not assign my copyright to the FSF,
> > nor to anyone else. All the code I write is GPL'ed.
> > You don't need to own the copyright on any code in
> > order to be able to enforce the GPL. [...]
> Indeed, and in fact for a long time the copyright
> was owned by me before it was assigned to the FSF.
> It's not required per se, but generally speaking,
> there must be a Maintainer of the Software who
> believes in the ideals of the GNU system
I do believe in the ideal of the GNU system: to have
computer systems that consist entirely of libre
software.
> and will adhere to the GNU coding standards
That is too bureaucratic, not libre enough.
Re: Nano is no longer a GNU project
#25Loads of us use nano.
Simple light editor without the overhead (read learning curve), of all the other big editors.
Sure, I might not write code in it, but when I need to edit a conf file or two, both on a server, and my desktop, it really hits the spot.
Re: Nano is no longer a GNU project
#26Earlier quoted context omitted.
I hear this faster for small things but if you use vim I would say I can make changes in a small document twice as fast. They should have a new tag line: Nano the plain text editor for non-Vim maybe EMACS users?
This is only true if you use vim at least once a week forever. Some people don't want to study a manual to change 1 config line. Call me crazy I know.
Yeah, maybe I'm just weird, but I like it when the down-arrow key makes the cursor go down a line.
Re: Nano is no longer a GNU project
#27don't want to sound nasty , but is anyone there using nano really ? i know it come by default in some distros but that's about it really.
Yup, love it.
Not as arcane as vim, great for small edits without the oh-crap-what-have-I-pressed-force-quit-start-over phenomenon that I get in vi. 'Serious' editing is done in gedit...
Re: Nano is no longer a GNU project
#28don't want to sound nasty , but is anyone there using nano really ? i know it come by default in some distros but that's about it really.
I use it, as a terminal editor, whenever I can. On my machines I use it instead of vi(m), and if I have control over a remote machine, there as well, I only use VI if a server doesn't have nano and I can't install it.
Re: Nano is no longer a GNU project
#29don't want to sound nasty , but is anyone there using nano really ? i know it come by default in some distros but that's about it really.
It fills a real need as the console-based text editor for people who don't know vi (and would usually use e.g. gedit rather than emacs).
(I'm sure it has other purposes too, but it's the most motivating one I know.)
Ubuntu X11 stopped working? Or perhaps you need to tweak the nginx config on that tiny VPS you're renting? If you don't know vim, nano is something that's very easy to use and often pre-installed.
Re: Nano is no longer a GNU project
#30From the mailing list, on using Github:
> Plus, in order to use their services, you need to assume liability
That sounds bad, as in really bad. One important function of Open Source licenses is to get as far away from liability as possible.
Do people here know whether that's just a misunderstanding, or a realistic risk of keeping code on Github?