[starseeker]

I note that with the exception of the sam code (which unfortunately uses the Lucent Public License Version 1.02, this editor is very liberally licensed (ISC/MIT/CC0).

If the sam code is optional or easily replaced, this could evolve to become a serious, modern text editor with a truly liberal license (something surprisingly absent from the current landscape, to the best of my knowledge - I've done a couple searches for an editor that could be embedded with an LGPL project, and the choices were pretty limited. This looks quite interesting.

From a portability standpoint, is there any chance of creating a native Windows version using something like http://www.projectpluto.com/win32a.htm ? That was another kicker when I was searching previously - only the really big editors like vim/emacs appear to have Windows ports...

[sdkmvx]

nvi? https://sites.google.com/a/bostic.com/keithbostic/vi/

Sure it doesn't have the features of Vim or Emacs (and some would say that's a feature!), but it's perfectly serviceable if you're okay with vi's modality.

[starseeker]

Close, but it doesn't appear to be active (the version you get from the download link is from 1996?) and it's using the 4 clause BSD license, which (as I understand it) poses GPL compatibility problems.

[swah]

Go is a good target for portable text editors these days, IMO: https://github.com/nsf/godit

[starseeker]

A good point. I didn't specify in my initial comment (and I should have) but one of our other criteria is to be able to build everything with just a C/C++ compiler. So we'd have to bundle/bootstrap Go just to build the editor, which I believe is too heavy to be practical for that (unfortunately).

[woah]

Microsoft VS Code is MIT licensed.

[falcolas]

For a standalone piece of software, what about licensing matters for your use cases?

[notzorbo3]

It's right there in his comment:

> I've done a couple searches for an editor that could be embedded with an LGPL project, and the choices were pretty limited.