New syntax files need feedback

[Vincent Cheng]

Hi quidame,

On Sat, Sep 29, 2012 at 5:32 PM, bilibop project <quidame at safe-mail.net> wrote:
<snip>
> Hmm... I suspect the conky.vim attachment has been modified on your side,
> maybe opened with a 'dos' editor, and ^M (carriage return) have been (silently?)
> added at the end of each line.  In all cases, this does not come from my side:
> the file I have attached with my post has md5sum:
>                 eef07d622d3c0a7f223c3a32857c8eec
> Yours, probably has md5sum:
>                 2152073300e4e33b349078d64900774e

Ah, you're right...I suppose gmail must have mangled your attachments
somehow? It would be just another quirk on gmail's already long list
of quirks.

<snip>
> Thanks for your investigations.
> Yes, it is a bit out of date (2006). There are some 'new' options now, and some
> options (as mysql_*) seem to have been removed (my conky.vim has been written
> by refering to the conky(1) manual page). And above all, this old file does not
> really manage important things, such as a lot of possible syntax errors, or even
> comments on the same line than settings.

If that's the case, you definitely want to consider forwarding your
vim syntax file upstream. Given that upstream already distributes a
copy, they may be interested in having a more up-to-date copy as well.

FWIW, conkyrc syntax highlighting in vim works for me now. Even with
syntax highlighting though, I don't think I'll be using vim to edit my
files anytime soon...but regardless, thanks for your work. I guess
it's really up to the vim maintainers now whether they would like to
include your contributions inside Debian's vim packages, which I can't
help with; good luck!

Regards,
Vincent