This is an old bug that did not gain substantial momentum after being
marked 'needs-progress' for a considerable amount of time.

The bug is closed as 'dead'.

If someone is actually working(!) on this issue again feel free to
reopen it, so the progress can be monitored within the BTS.

This is an old bug that did not move for a considerable amount of
time. Therefore this issue is marked as 'needs-progress'. We will be
monitoring this issue for the period of a month. If it does not gain
substantial momentum up to that time, the bug will be closed as 'dead'.

Ping?

* Frank Terbeck [20080702 10:10]:
> Alexander Steinböck:

> > commands. And these refer to zshCommands. But it may be better to
> > label the functions introduced by grml by another color, as you
> > suggested. Red or yellow would be a way to go, won't it? Just let me
> > know, and it's done.

> Well, red (for me) feels like a string or a constant numeric value.
> Yellow is often (always?) used for keywords.

> Since nobody else (read: mika) objected to your 1st patch, I don't
> want to be the one blocking this, as I don't use grml's vim config,
> so I won't see this "issue" on my systems anyway.

> Mika?
> If you're busy ATM, 'yes' or 'no' is enough. :-)

Well, I like the idea to support grml's keywords in Vim and it looks
good to me. Though I'm not yet sure about which style/color we should use.

Maybe one/some more indipendent users (read: non-grml-developers) should
be asked as a reference? Alex, could you please make some screenshots and
ask in #grml? That would be great.

thx && regards,
-mika-

Alexander Steinböck <bts@bts.grml.org>:
> Alexander Steinböck <z3ttacht@grml.org> added the comment:
> * Frank Terbeck <bts@bts.grml.org>:
> > > Selected keywords found in /etc/grml/lsb-functions get highlighted in
> > > Z-Shell scripts in the way Z-Shell commands are.
> > I'm not against this, per se; However, I find it a little irritating,
> > that we start to colorize functions the same way that builtins are.
> > Another color, maybe?
[...]
> commands. And these refer to zshCommands. But it may be better to
> label the functions introduced by grml by another color, as you
> suggested. Red or yellow would be a way to go, won't it? Just let me
> know, and it's done.

Well, red (for me) feels like a string or a constant numeric value.
Yellow is often (always?) used for keywords.

Since nobody else (read: mika) objected to your 1st patch, I don't
want to be the one blocking this, as I don't use grml's vim config,
so I won't see this "issue" on my systems anyway.

Mika?
If you're busy ATM, 'yes' or 'no' is enough. :-)

Regards, Frank

* Frank Terbeck <bts@bts.grml.org>:
> > Selected keywords found in /etc/grml/lsb-functions get highlighted in
> > Z-Shell scripts in the way Z-Shell commands are.
> I'm not against this, per se; However, I find it a little irritating,
> that we start to colorize functions the same way that builtins are.
> Another color, maybe?
That shouldn't be a problem, I guess. I was just geared to the
coloring of alias, hash etc. since functions as xhashd, xalias etc.
provide similar but enhanced functionality of the aforementioned
commands. And these refer to zshCommands. But it may be better to
label the functions introduced by grml by another color, as you
suggested. Red or yellow would be a way to go, won't it? Just let me
know, and it's done.

Alexander Steinböck <bts@bts.grml.org>:
> Selected keywords found in /etc/grml/lsb-functions get highlighted in
> Z-Shell scripts in the way Z-Shell commands are. For instance, einfo,
> eerror and the like get colored as print or echo. Same applies to
> {x,s}alias and xhashd respectively.

I'm not against this, per se; However, I find it a little irritating,
that we start to colorize functions the same way that builtins are.
Another color, maybe?

Regards, Frank

-- 
In protocol design, perfection has been reached not when there is
nothing left to add, but when there is nothing left to take away.
                                                  -- RFC 1925

Selected keywords found in /etc/grml/lsb-functions get highlighted in
Z-Shell scripts in the way Z-Shell commands are. For instance, einfo,
eerror and the like get colored as print or echo. Same applies to
{x,s}alias and xhashd respectively.

I've chosen the more common keywords when writing zsh scripts. And
since most of the other -- found in /etc/grml/{net,script}-functions
for instance -- 'feel' more like external programs in the context, I
haven't included them. These refer to getLanDevices, check4{root,user}
and the like. Of course, it would be no problem to integrate them as
well.