4 ms·
> I was thinking about trying out Onivim someday but this one thing was the whole dealbreaker. I thought that if your program is advertised to be light and fast
by vimacs2 5y ago
> I was thinking about trying out Onivim someday but this one thing was the whole dealbreaker. I thought that if your program is advertised to be light and fast it would also be easy to build, but welp that's unfortunately not the case.
This is not really a reasonable expectation to have for non-free software. The software is made for those willing to pay the licensing fee to download a prebuilt binary, not those that will end up wanting to compile it themselves. Fast performance != fast build times.
I personally appreciate the fact that the source is even provided - though obviously with a non free license.
- lasagnaphil 5y agoI am actually willing to pay it if I can try a demo of it beforehand and confirm that it’s good (like I have paid for Sublime Merge). The problem is that I can’t try it without paying first. (And I’m also disappointed at the fact that a software that strives for fastness and lightness is so much of a monstrous hassle to build. This has nothing to do with free/non-free software.)
- mdaniel 5y agoThere's a middle ground: they have a cloud based build descriptors (currently reporting as failing, but exists), so one could make use of GitHub's disk and cpu if dedicating that much of a local computer is annoying