Bug 112549
Summary: | missing gedit plugins | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | paolo borelli <pborelli> |
Component: | gedit | Assignee: | Dan Williams <dcbw> |
Status: | CLOSED DUPLICATE | QA Contact: | |
Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | medium | ||
Version: | rawhide | CC: | wtogami |
Target Milestone: | --- | ||
Target Release: | --- | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
Last Closed: | 2006-02-21 19:00:29 UTC | Type: | --- |
Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
Embargoed: |
Description
paolo borelli
2003-12-22 19:33:50 UTC
Doh! I wish I had seen this report sooner and I would have lobbied for this to be added to FC2. I believe it is too late now. Warren, should we get this into FC3? Are the gedit plugins interesting? > are the gedit plugins interesting? Yes I think so, at least a couple of them, e.g. the "diff" plugin > should we get it in FC3? Nope: unfortunately gedit-plugins upstream package is currently unamainatined for lack of resources, see http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=132819 The current FC gedit package should include the plugins, they just aren't enabled by default (use Preferences to enable more). A new package taht enables the Spell checker plugin by default is now in Rawhide. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 131607 *** Dan, I know that the gedit package contains some plugins... I even wrote one of them :) What this bug was about is the *additional* gedit-plugins package (gedit-plugins module in cvs.gnome.org) which contains some more plugins which starting with gedit 2.4 were moved out from the main tarball. The most significant of these is the diff plugin. So I don't think this is a dup of the above bug. However I don't know if I should reopen or not, especially considering that the upstream package unfortunately is at the moment unmaintained... Ah, sorry, right you are. I think, when the package becomes re-maintained, we should do a new bug for Feature/Enhancement for it? Does that sound OK? Yup. agreed. Changed to 'CLOSED' state since 'RESOLVED' has been deprecated. |