Thread

On caring for user data: NeoVim caused Vim undo files to be deleted

384 points · 346 comments · jandeboevrie

dlisboa · 1790522895 · focus · HN ↗
> the attitude that just because something is a persistent file on your filesystem that contains data that you might want is no reason for their program not to delete it meant they had no concept of a duty of care to their users.
That's the wrong way to look at it. NeoVIM has a different concept of care for their users. They're optimizing for another kind of care, more in line with modern expectations, which VIM did not care about (hence the fork).
It's not better or worse, just different.
This same article could've been written about how VIM has no native LSP integration or autocomplete and they don't have duty or care for their users.
1. pdonis · 1790523038 · focus · HN ↗
  Deleting important data without warning is not the same as not providing a feature users might want.
  1. luma · 1790525196 · focus · HN ↗
    There is a flip side to this - is vim encrypting this data it keeps forever? If I delete something I consider sensitive, I might unwittingly be recording that presumed-deleted piece of data to my user profile somewhere to be deleted never.
    jeremyjh · 1790525382 · focus · HN ↗
    Stop looking for post-hoc justifications for behavior that is clearly wrong.
    phoghed · 1790526022 · focus · HN ↗
    Second time in this thread you’re telling other people how to think and behave because they aren’t acting like you
    tehwebguy · 1790527479 · focus · HN ↗
    OK and you are doing the dril wise man tweet sincerely
    phoghed · 1790556115 · focus · HN ↗
    How would you know?
    sebzim4500 · 1790525712 · focus · HN ↗
    Not really since the feature is opt in
    MaxBarraclough · 1790525779 · focus · HN ↗
    Vim's persist undo is disabled by default, perhaps for privacy reasons. edit: I see sebzim4500 got there first.
    * <a href="https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49867678">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49867678
    * <a href="https://bastian.rieck.me/blog/2015/persistent_undo_vim/" rel="nofollow">https://bastian.rieck.me/blog/2015/persistent_undo_vim/
    webstrand · 1790525808 · focus · HN ↗
    That doesn't justify its deletion, it might justify warning the user, but unconditionally deleting data not owned by the app shared with other apps?
    nikanj · 1790527460 · focus · HN ↗
    How could you possibly encrypt it in a way that holds water? Any attacker who cares enough to get your undo file can also get your undo keys, unless you want to wire a whole system of undo-now-requires-password-auth-with-MFA

Open on Hacker News to reply ↗

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.