Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Vim Boss

neovim.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 123 posts

Re: Vim Boss

#21

Post by michaelmrose »

tequila_shot wrote: post #3
michaelmrose wrote: post #2

It is nice to see tasteful and profitable disagreement in place of simple drama. It's a credit to all parties.

sorry, what disagreement? I didn't find any in the article.

Disagreement insofar as the direction of vim. Neovim choosing to go there on way on functionality they wanted to implement both ultimately enriched vim as some ideas found there way into vim proper and gave the community additional options.

Such splits aren't always handled well and value is lost when good ideas aren't merged back because of personal reasons and when contributors stop contributing because they are turned off by the drama. See libav vs ffmpeg.

Re: Vim Boss

#22

Post by aprao »

I reflected on my Vim journey after Bram passed away. It has been my only constant professional companion in the past 10 years - from university projects to FAANGs to everything-on-fire startups. All professional work I have done - the ones I am proud of, the ones that I am ashamed of, the ones that got me promotions and the ones that resulted in $M SEVs - was done on Vim. Oses/DBs/PLs/companies/co-workers come and go, but Vim has been forever.

Thanks Bram.

Re: Vim Boss

#23

Post by anon7331 »

MSFT_Edging wrote: post #4

I once interviewed an intern candidate who bragged about getting into an argument with Bram on the mailing lists over a possible vulnerability. Bram insisted it was not important, and this young gun insisted it was. We didn't hire the guy. It's interesting seeing these memorials for Bram, from what people say he was the polar opposite of this kid in a good way.

Was this kid arguing about the automatic encrypt/decrypt file capability and Bram's unwillingness to use a cryptographically secure algorithm? It was a long, long thread that got heated.

I was with Bram though! It was never meant to be secure in a cryptographic sense...

Re: Vim Boss

#24

Post by bla3 »

RetroTechie wrote: post #15

Thought a linked article: https://j11g.com/2023/08/07/the-legacy-of-bram-moolenaar/ By Jan van den Berg, was a better read. One quote: "Vim is a masterpiece, the gleaming precise machining tool from which so much of modernity was crafted". And then this link: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=eX9m3g5J-XA "7 Habits for Effective Text Editing 2.0" 1h20m - If anyone has a transcript or summary: plz. But this was funny - fir…

I don't know if it's necessary to be competitive about eulogies, but the one you posted was also touching. Thank you for posting it. The picture of Bram's GitHub contribution graph is haunting.

Re: Vim Boss

#26

Post by lost_tourist »

dudus wrote: post #14
michaelmrose wrote: post #2

It is nice to see tasteful and profitable disagreement in place of simple drama. It's a credit to all parties.

Is there any disagreement on who is going to support Vim moving forward? I can see the fork maintainers going into a power struggle if the future is unclear. Maybe some will even write fluffy pieces on how much they loved Bram to gather support...

Neovim and vim are very independent projects, so this doesn't really affect neovim all that much. Is that what you're talking about?

Re: Vim Boss

#27

Post by mlry »

RetroTechie wrote: post #15

Thought a linked article: https://j11g.com/2023/08/07/the-legacy-of-bram-moolenaar/ By Jan van den Berg, was a better read. One quote: "Vim is a masterpiece, the gleaming precise machining tool from which so much of modernity was crafted". And then this link: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=eX9m3g5J-XA "7 Habits for Effective Text Editing 2.0" 1h20m - If anyone has a transcript or summary: plz. But this was funny - fir…

>"7 Habits for Effective Text Editing 2.0"

>1h20m - If anyone has a transcript or summary: plz. But this was funny - first comment:

Here you go: https://moolenaar.net/habits_2007.pdf

Courtesy of tlamponi [1]:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37013315

Re: Vim Boss

#28

Post by coldtea »

anon7331 wrote: post #23
MSFT_Edging wrote: post #4

I once interviewed an intern candidate who bragged about getting into an argument with Bram on the mailing lists over a possible vulnerability. Bram insisted it was not important, and this young gun insisted it was. We didn't hire the guy. It's interesting seeing these memorials for Bram, from what people say he was the polar opposite of this kid in a good way.

Was this kid arguing about the automatic encrypt/decrypt file capability and Bram's unwillingness to use a cryptographically secure algorithm? It was a long, long thread that got heated. I was with Bram though! It was never meant to be secure in a cryptographic sense...

"Never meant to be cryptographically secure" should never go together with "encrypt/decrypt file capability".

This can even mean someone's loss of life in the right (meaning wrong) regime, or property (e.g. storing bitcoin info there).

It's like advertising a "self-driving technology" when your car needs human supervision to not crash and kill you or someone you fall into.

Re: Vim Boss

#29

Post by coldtea »

SpaceManNabs wrote: post #18
BlackjackCF wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some people take issue with NeoVim, because they believe it splits the Vim community and takes people power away from Vim development.

> because they believe it splits the Vim community and takes people power away from Vim development I don't understand this point, and I tried to parse it and still don't. (I understand that you are just relaying it). If vim maintainers don't want neovim to exist, they should have accepted the merges earlier. If they disagree with the merges (which I think they did), then that power doesn't belong in Vim anyways. edi…

>I don't understand this point, and I tried to parse it and still don't. (...) If vim maintainers don't want neovim to exist, they should have accepted the merges earlier. If they disagree with the merges (which I think they did), then that power doesn't belong in Vim anyways

It's a very simple point to understand: whether the merges are good or not, the presence of a fork still "splits the Vim community and takes people power away from Vim development".

And if they're bad (which is the way they see it), they do it for no good reason too.

That's regardless of people "having the right to fork". Yes they do. But also yes, if they exercize that right, they do split a community and divert interest from a project to 2 projects.

Re: Vim Boss

#30

Post by anon7331 »

coldtea wrote: post #28
anon7331 wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Was this kid arguing about the automatic encrypt/decrypt file capability and Bram's unwillingness to use a cryptographically secure algorithm? It was a long, long thread that got heated. I was with Bram though! It was never meant to be secure in a cryptographic sense...

"Never meant to be cryptographically secure" should never go together with "encrypt/decrypt file capability". This can even mean someone's loss of life in the right (meaning wrong) regime, or property (e.g. storing bitcoin info there). It's like advertising a "self-driving technology" when your car needs human supervision to not crash and kill you or someone you fall into.

I am not sure it's so black and white with encryption. It depends on your threat model. Keeping it secure from an angry ex-girlfriend is one thing, but keeping it secure from a three letter agency is another.

The mistake you are referring to is someone that assumes "encrypted" means three letter agency safe, which is a pretty terrible way to leverage encryption. In that case, it's exactly like hopping in a Tesla and assuming auto pilot will take you home without your supervision.

Post reply on HN