[arch-general] Where should system-wide vim files go?

[Magnus Therning]

On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 10:04, Oon-Ee Ng <ngoonee.talk at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 4:41 PM, Magnus Therning <magnus at therning.org> wrote:
>> 2011/4/5 János Illés <ijanos at gmail.com>:
>>> On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 13:18, Magnus Therning <magnus at therning.org> wrote:
>>>> IMNSHO there are *very* few vim extensions that should ever be
>>>> installed centrally.  I'd recommend every vim user to embrace
>>>> GetLatestVimScripts[1] instead.  For the other stuff (read "broken vim
>>>> extensions") I created vim-scripts-mgr[2].  :-)
>>>
>>> I'm interested in the cons of having centrally installed vim plugins.
>>> For me it seems these things you mentioned are basically doing a job
>>> of a package manager (keeping track of, and updating files) so why not
>>> use pacman for this purpose?
>>
>> Because the vast majority of vim extensions I've come across are
>> turned on as soon as they are installed, which means that installing
>> them centrally turns them on for *all* users on the system.
>>
>> /M
>
> Which (for some of us at least) would be the point. Most extensions
> that I use don't actually do anything outside their specific purview,
> so having many installed doesn't necessarily affect anything. In the
> case of colourschemes, having them installed system-wide means
> everyone can use them, which is good, isn't it? Rather than each
> person having to copy/install them individually.

Indeed, there are arguably some exceptions, but I continue to argue
that the majority of vim extensions should be installed on a per-user
basis.

/M

-- 
Magnus Therning                      OpenPGP: 0xAB4DFBA4
email: magnus at therning.org   jabber: magnus at therning.org
twitter: magthe               http://therning.org/magnus