"default shell" [was: Re: CVS commit: src/usr.sbin/user]

[Hubert Feyrer <hubert%feyrer.de@localhost>]

On Sat, 30 Sep 2006, Alistair Crooks wrote:
> > > Last I saw of the discussion, no agreement had been reached.
> >
> > The discussion just faded away with (IIRC) no strong arguments against the
> > change.
>
> And, equally, the reaction to the proposed change should have been a
> hint that not everyone agreed with it.

True.

The question that I'm wondering about is, what is our long term goal here:
Do we want to offer people a shell that they can feel comfortable with
from the start (ie. base), or do we want to keep a minimal one and tell
people clearly that if they want more they should install the package?
If we want a comfortable shell, should it be csh- or sh-flavoured?
Should the (default) command line editing of a comfortable shell be vi- or 
emacs-flavoured?

I understand that a lot of flaming could be done about all of the options,
but how about having this decide from NetBSD's project management, and
then just go with it? (I'm tired of yet another discussion without 
result, obviously).


 - Hubert