From: Tony Mechelynck, Fri, March 18, 2011 5:51 am > On 18/03/11 03:11, Steve Hall wrote: > > > > Can we not start distributing .vimrc and _vimrc instead of relying > > on the installer to create these? > [...] > > If we distribute .vimrc and _vimrc, wouldn't that clobber any > existing user vimrc during an upgrade, the way, let's say, > $VIMRUNTIME/syntax/vim.vim is overwritten by an upgrade?
Depends on how it is distributed. I've always thought it odd that the default vimrc requires any lines at all. Why is the default behavior of the application required to be varied by a vimrc? A vimrc is for a user to alter defaults, but as long as I can remember Vim has distributed one with features differing by distribution. (Raise your hand if you count 100 times you've seen a Windows Vim user confused by the mswin line in _vimrc.) And each installer has to prompt the user whether or not to overwrite the existing vimrc. On silent installs, OS upgrades, new OS installs, etc., what should be the default? IMO, the "correct" behavior should be an empty vimrc named "vimrc-example". Various features can be included (commented) with simple explanatory text, like a reference tutorial of the top 100 features most users tamper with. The first line explains how to rename the file to "activate" it. Then all the distributions can include the same file, nobody gets their customized vimrc clobbered, and the default Vim behavior is the same for everybody. -- Steve Hall [ digitect dancingpaper com ] :: Cream for Vim (http://cream.sourceforge.net) -- You received this message from the "vim_dev" 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
