[tequila_shot]

sorry, what disagreement? I didn't find any in the article.

[ampersandy]

The implied disagreement for why neovim exists to provide functionality that wouldn’t have been merged into vim.

[michaelmrose]

Disagreement insofar as the direction of vim. Neovim choosing to go there on way on functionality they wanted to implement both ultimately enriched vim as some ideas found there way into vim proper and gave the community additional options.

Such splits aren't always handled well and value is lost when good ideas aren't merged back because of personal reasons and when contributors stop contributing because they are turned off by the drama. See libav vs ffmpeg.

[BlackjackCF]

Some people take issue with NeoVim, because they believe it splits the Vim community and takes people power away from Vim development.

[SpaceManNabs]

> because they believe it splits the Vim community and takes people power away from Vim development

I don't understand this point, and I tried to parse it and still don't. (I understand that you are just relaying it).

If vim maintainers don't want neovim to exist, they should have accepted the merges earlier. If they disagree with the merges (which I think they did), then that power doesn't belong in Vim anyways.

edit: this reminds me of this conversation from years ago

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14245705

Check DSMan195276's comments.

And finally before I derail, I want to bring stuff back to the focus: RIP Braam.

[anyonecancode]

That feels a bit like criticizing all the c-style programming languages for splitting the C community... Which is an analogy I rather like, as it suggest Vim has become so foundational that its legacy goes beyond the direct users of it. I've certainly found that to be so, as in addition to using vim itself, I also use its key bindings wherever I can.

[prmoustache]

Some people can't grasp how the world is working.