/etc/alternatives/editor should default to nano

[66dny9r02]

Currently, /etc/alternatives/editor points to vim. I think more users are
comfortable with nano, so I would suggest to let it point there.

[Colin Watson (cjwatson)]

I agree, but we need to be a bit careful about exactly how we do this. For my
reference, here's the rationale for the current alternatives layout:

  http://lists.debian.org/debian-policy/2000/06/msg00122.html

[Matt Zimmerman (mdz)]

Am I the only one who thinks that a global, package-provided priority has
entirely the wrong semantics for alternatives anyway? :-P

[66dny9r02 (66dny9r02)]

Maybe nano could be given a priority 130 (higher than the 120 of vim) for Hoary,
awaiting a (maybe completely different) end solution? (Or of course the other
way around: vim a priority of 30; maybe that would be better.)
In the end (if the alternatives system is kept), I would expect that editors
that aren't installed by default would get a higher priority than the ones that
are (because the user apparently wants to use the editor by installing it).

[Colin Watson (cjwatson)]

vim (1:6.3-046+1ubuntu4) hoary; urgency=low

  * Drop editor alternative priority to 35, since Ubuntu installs vim by
    default (closes: Ubuntu #4710).

 -- Colin Watson <email address hidden> Tue, 1 Mar 2005 15:37:33 +0000