Talk:Gedit

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Perl (Rated Start-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Perl, a collaborative effort to write Perl programs for using and developing Wikipedia, share scripts, and improve Wikipedia's coverage of the Perl programming language. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.

Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.
 
WikiProject Computing (Rated Start-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Apple Inc. (Rated Start-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Apple Inc., a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Apple, Macintosh, iOS and related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
Checklist icon
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Free Software / Software / Computing  (Rated Start-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Free Software, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of free software on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Software.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Computing.
 

Untitled[edit]

Can someone familiar with gedit add it to Comparison of text editors??? I would, but I'm not knowledgeable enough with it to know those features.

Extentions[edit]

When programming your own extensions there are variables that can be called related to the file like $GEDIT_CURRENT_DOCUMENT_PATH. Could we produce a table of all of them? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.213.3.6 (talk) 02:30, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Advertisement??[edit]

OK, someone complained about the article written as an advertisement. I'm willing to rewrite the article a little, since I'll make some evaluation about rewriting the s/w gedit itself. But an {{Advert}} complaint should usually be matched by an explanation what's wrong on this talk page. So, now I'm asking: insert any specific complaints here, please! Said: Rursus 14:36, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

A fast read-thru gives the impression of this article simply being a very neutral, somewhat stubby description on what gedit can do, and else no evaluation for or against. I think the {{Advert}} tag should be replaced with {{stub}} or some such; it's as neutral as the color of granite. Said: Rursus 14:40, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
Well, I just went over the article and basically fixed all the complaints I had. The main one was that, as I suspected, there were a couple of places where material was quoted without a citation. Fortunately, the major instance of this was from a GFDL page, so it isn't a problem. Now, if I can just work on remembering to be bold the first time I edit a page... « Aaron Rotenberg « Talk « 18:19, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
Very well! I use to appreciate be bold from anyone, but sometimes such as yesterday, I was some little too bold regarding the half life of Dubnium, so I had to remake some 3 times, because I found more and more sources telling me new halflifes ;-). I'm still not exactly sure if my edits were correct, or just a backwards update. Said: Rursus 19:30, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Citation format[edit]

As per http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citing_sources#Citation_styles, shouldn't somebody change it to include Free Software Magazine, Andrew Min, etcetera? I would, but I don't know how. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.5.119.44 (talk) 17:51, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Userboxes[edit]

If you use gedit, please feel free to put any of these on your user page!

Code Result
 {{User:Rugby471/Userboxes/gedit}}
Gedit-logo.png
This user contributes with gEdit
Transclusions
 {{User:Ahunt/gedit}}
GeditLogo2010.png This user creates websites with gedit
Transclusions

- Ahunt (talk) 20:06, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Pros and cons[edit]

OK, gedit is wide spread enough that some pros and cons might be appropriate for the article. (For my part it's a notepad that has too many facilities). But I'll see what I can find out there. Said: Rursus () 09:06, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Just for fun (zero seriosity factor), before making a survey:
google:"gedit rules" - 269,
google:"gedit sucks" - 240,
so it actually rules a little more than it sucks. Said: Rursus () 09:09, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
As long as you can find acceptable sources then a criticism section would be good. - Ahunt (talk) 11:52, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
Yes of course. Except the topic in question, and its public, determines what's acceptable. And the public is You, so what do You think is acceptable? Said: Rursus () 15:09, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Programmers' needs[edit]

This text has bumped in and out now and then:

As of May 2008 gedit lacks the capability of split windows and viewing one file by multiple windows, a common feature of program text editors.

I think such clauses do qualify for programs that is intended to fulfill some purposes, f.ex. programmers needs, even though the text editor can be used for example for other purposes as well. So I think it should be in the article, however not necessarily in the intro. Move it around, but don't shrink the article into informative void, please! Said: Rursus () 18:08, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

I think you have a good point that this does belong in the article, although it needs a reference. The article needs a criticism section and this belongs in that, not in the lead, so I have started a criticism section and moved the statement there. Let me see if I can find a ref for this. - Ahunt (talk) 18:58, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
Reference found and added to the section. - Ahunt (talk) 19:10, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
Good! I think using the bug-list of the program can be considered being a very neutral source of criticisms, since it implies the feature is going to be implemented in the future anyways. Said: Rursus () 19:20, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
Glad that was helpful. I see the bug list for any application as being a fair source of criticism information along with published reviews as well! If you are interested I also found a list of outstanding gedit bugs, although it didn't list this one. I found that through a bug search instead. This should be a source of major criticisms, although no need to list all of them. In many cases the bug reports themselves include a response from the developers which can be used as a counterpoint. For instance in the bug report cited one developer (it doesn't say he is a gedit developer) states that he doesn't see gedit as being used for coding. - Ahunt (talk) 19:29, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
Oh look, it's Gedit with split view
To say it "lacks the capability" implies that it is not possible to do something. This is nonsense: split view plugins abound (example). It seems to be quite common in the Linux world for programs to leave all but the most basic features to plugins, as it allows program customisability without recompiling. E.g. in Evolution (software), functionality such as the initial setup wizard, new mail notification, and junk filter are all plugins rather than in the core program. Most distros feel that this is needed functionality, and so have the plugins in the default install; which is why the Evolution article isn't cluttered up with people complaining that Evolution "lacks the capability of a junk filter, a common feature of email programs". I've no idea how many distros ship a split view plugin by default, but if whoever first added the criticism's distro doesn't, that's hardly a criticism of gedit. -- simxp (talk) 04:16, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

Logo about to change[edit]

There is a contest to change the logo of gedit: http://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2010/03/gedit-want-new-logo.html

Well I guess if they change the logo we can put the new one in the article. - Ahunt (talk) 12:35, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

When was Gedit developed/released?[edit]

. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.187.97.3 (talk) 21:45, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

It is right in the info box "Initial release 12 February 1999". - Ahunt (talk) 22:42, 3 May 2011 (UTC)