Path: csiph.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: ted@loft.tnolan.com (Ted Nolan <tednolan>)
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc,alt.folklore.computers
Subject: Re: Recent history of vi
Date: 9 Dec 2025 04:47:30 GMT
Organization: loft
Lines: 23
Message-ID: <mppnv2F71vrU1@mid.individual.net>
References: <CtydnVqzjrtfd5P0nZ2dnZfqn_adnZ2d@giganews.com> <830j0mxn2u.ln2@Telcontar.valinor> <mppb8qF4g71U4@mid.individual.net> <eli$2512082325@qaz.wtf>
X-Trace: individual.net WC1Q419BmY8Yje+CZyLISw4cbqzktYhIqGm77wjx9IARPTqZPZ
X-Orig-Path: not-for-mail
Cancel-Lock: sha1:sSglpJpWTKyF7HQcCLdwR3xFkxw= sha256:zIYLdYNl8vWvcDu3CBvJWlcwOsmSTAEIyuOpgwC6qO8=
X-Newsreader: trn 4.0-test76 (Apr 2, 2001)
Xref: csiph.com comp.os.linux.misc:78536 alt.folklore.computers:232474

In article <eli$2512082325@qaz.wtf>,
Eli the Bearded  <*@eli.users.panix.com> wrote:
>In comp.os.linux.misc, rbowman  <bowman@montana.com> wrote:
>> The Douay-Rheims is a translation of the Vulgate. Pius XII suggested a new 
>> translation from the Hebrew and Greek that resulted in the Jerusalem 
>> Bible, which is the one I have. The first version was in French but that 
>> spurred an English translation. The editors of the New Jerusalem Bible 
>> thought the Jerusalem Bible was more a translation from French than the 
>> original sources and tried again. Then there was the Revised New Jerusalem 
>> Bible that was supposed to be more literal but had gender inclusive 
>> language. 
>> 
>> Will the real bible please stand up?
>
>I think it predates version control. Definitely predates Linux.
>
>It is amazing to me how far off-topic this group gets.
>

I read the title as "Secret history of vi".
-- 
columbiaclosings.com
What's not in Columbia anymore..