to summarize the conclusions thus far, as is my secretary duty
amendments to the protocol of this EU directive are as follows in the first line of stallings amendments:
TECO is to be legacy alternative to EMACS and all personell are to be provided paid leave for educational purposes.
ED is to be legacy alternative to VIM and all personell are to be provided paid leave for educational purposes.
up for further discussion: are ideologically united editors such as VILE (VI Like Emacs) middleground or offensive to both parties? is it right of marginalized editors to invoke a non-monopolyculture clause: “will SAM or VIS be up for consideration?” asks [name redacted under GDPR]
to summarize the conclusions thus far, as is my secretary duty
amendments to the protocol of this EU directive are as follows in the first line of
stallingsamendments:TECO is to be legacy alternative to EMACS and all personell are to be provided paid leave for educational purposes.
ED is to be legacy alternative to VIM and all personell are to be provided paid leave for educational purposes.
up for further discussion: are ideologically united editors such as VILE (VI Like Emacs) middleground or offensive to both parties? is it right of marginalized editors to invoke a non-mono
polyculture clause: “will SAM or VIS be up for consideration?” asks [name redacted under GDPR]