>Isn't our vi(1) actually nvi? If so, shouldn't feature additions=20
>like this go through the original authors?
> =20
>Imho, adding features to vi(1) is not appropriate. If you want a=20
>more featureful vi-like editor, use pkgsrc/editors/vim. As it=20

	yes, you should contact nvi/vim authors instead.

>stands, nvi is a (nearly) bug-for-bug copy of real (encumbered)
>vi(1).

	btw, what happened to AT&T license source code made public under
	BSD license?  I would like to see REAL vi (with lisp mode) in the
	system if possible :-)

itojun