On Thu, Apr 11, 2019 at 10:38:18PM -0400, James McCoy wrote: > On Sat, Jun 18, 2016 at 03:01:05PM -0700, Josh Triplett wrote: > > Vim supports loading "packages", typically installed as > > ~/.vim/pack/$package . A package consists of files under > > ~/.vim/pack/$package/start/$name/* and optionally > > ~/.vim/pack/$package/opt/$name/* . The files under those directories > > match the standard runtime directory layout (doc, ftdetect, ftplugin, > > indent, plugin, ...). > > > > 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. > > The symlink doesn't need updating when the set of files in the package > > change (which also makes it simpler and more robust to track in a git > > home directory). And since the directory contains a single package, it > > can compile and include a tags file with helpztags, rather than having > > vim-addon-manager compile a combined one at user installation time. > > I uploaded a new package, dh-vim-addon, which provides support for > managing vim addons by leveraging Vim's "packages". It's available in > Buster and I'll likely start nudging people to switch to it after Buster > is released. > > I've started work on converting vim-scripts to use dh-vim-addon, but I > haven't fully thought through how to manage the migration for users. At > the worst, it will simply be a NEWS.Debian entry explaining how to > handle it. > > The vim addon policy should probably move to dh-vim-addon at some point, > since that seems like a better home than the vim-doc package (especially > as dh-vim-addon supports neovim).
Awesome, thank you! I did see dh-vim-addon when it entered the archive, and it fully addresses this (assuming packages start using it).
