Re: Why Vimball archives are evil?

panshizhu@routon.com wrote:
> vim_use@googlegroups.com 写于 2010-09-26 09:51:37:
>> The more steps required, the more likely he is to move
>> on to something else without trying the plugin.
>
> Agree, so why not simply provide .vim files, which does not need to be
> decompressed at all?

Well, in my case, the Txtfmt plugin consists of 3 .vim files (each of
which goes in a different directory), and 1 .txt file. Apart from the
obvious inconvenience of forcing a user to download and deal with 4
different files, the fact is that the script upload page permits you to
upload only 1 file per release.

>
> I usually distribute my scripts in plain .vim format. Trying to integrate
> everything into one single .vim isn't quite difficult.

Actually, this is precisely what Vimball does! It creates a single,
plain-text file that contains all the plugin scripts, plus the Vim
script required to split them into their respective destination
directories. You simply open the file with Vim and execute...

:so %

...at the command line. An autocommand even prompts you to do this, in
case you're unfamiliar with vimball and neglected to read the
instructions on the download page. Moreover, since Vim knows where it
will look for plugin scripts, it can figure out an appropriate place to
install them. It uses the first directory in 'rtp' by default. Of
course, you can easily override this default by setting g:vimball_home.
It is a solution that requires only Vim to work. If you can run Vim, you
can easily install the plugin.

Is it only the file extension and its obvious association with Visual
Basic that bothers you?

Sincerely,
Brett Stahlman

>
> For Windows Vim user, it would be much better too see something end with
> .vim than .vba, (change it to .vima would be great.)
>
> --
> Sincerely, Pan, Shi Zhu.
>

--
You received this message from the "vim_use" maillist.
Do not top-post! Type your reply below the text you are replying to.
For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php