Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by hesitz 5111 days ago
I'm the main developer of VimOrganizer. I'm sure other people have had this reaction, but it mostly results from not fully understanding what Org-mode is and how it works. Org-mode is many things to many people, with a feature set that's deep and wide, and even many Org-mode users don't know everything it does, barely scratch the surface.

Regarding the issue of running an Emacs server alongside VimOrganizer: Would you rather a tiny Vim project try to duplicate all of Orgmode's functionality when (1) only a small percentage of Org-mode directly involves editing text, (2) many of the major Org-mode features are basically batch operations that export and/or evaluate an entire file at a time, and (3) Emacs is lightweight and functions well as a server for Org-mode batch operations, and (4) Vim's stated philosophy is to co-exist and interoperate with other apps in the Unix toolchain?

It's a matter of not reinventing the wheel. Org-mode is a pretty large project, probably approaching 100k lines of code. It's been around many years, heavily developed the entire time and it still presents a quickly moving target, new features and bugfixes added almost daily. What sense does it make to try to duplicate tens of thousands of lines of non-editing related code in a fledgling Vim project? Why not make use of Emacs/Orgmode as a server, a function it does well, and leverage the entire Orgmode project?

Although most heavy VimOrganizer uses would want to keep an Emacs server running, they don't ever need to edit a file in Emacs. At most they need to do some minor configuration in the .emacs config file, but that can be done by editing the .emacs file in Vim.