On Jun 18, 2016 6:03 PM, "Josh Triplett" <j...@joshtriplett.org> wrote: > [Note: in addition to changing vim-addon-manager, this would ideally go > along with some minor updates to the vim packaging policy in the vim > package; I'd be happy to supply a patch for that.]
N.B., vam already has some support for using a directory to contain a plugin, like pathogen does. This wasn't officially announced because of a bootstrapping issue which is now solved with Vim's packages. I'm currently working on getting that merged in NeoVim so we can have consistent handling. > This format has the advantage that the user can add a single directory > (or symlink) for a package, keeping all that package's files together. Agreed. It solves a number of issues which have been the main things holding me back from updating the vim-scripts package. > I would suggest installing packages under /usr/share/vim/packages, and > replacing the "files" key in the registry yaml files with "package: > pkgname", where pkgname matches the top-level directory in > /usr/share/vim/packages. When installing a package, vim-addon-manager > should just make a single symlink from ~/.vim/pack/$pkgname to > /usr/share/vim/packages/$pkgname. Good suggestions. We currently use ~/.vim/bundle iirc, but since I don't think it's really used anywhere, I'd be fine changing it. My remaining quandary is how to properly handle disabling a systemwide plugin while not interfering with a user's plugin of the same name (e.g., installing a newer version locally when the sysadmin also has it enabled). Cheers, James