El sáb, 17-01-2009 a las 02:47 +0200, Ville Skyttä escribió: > On Saturday 17 January 2009, Santiago M. Mola wrote: > > revno: 1252 > > committer: Ville Skyttä <[email protected]> > > branch nick: current > > timestamp: Thu 2009-01-15 00:38:07 +0200 > > message: > > Add --rsyncable to gzip completion (not in upstream gzip (yet?), but > > commonly patched into various distros' packages). > > > > We should not be adding completion non-upstream things. That patch would > > be better in distros who have the --rsyncable option for gzip. > > Otherwise, people using upstream version are getting wrong completion. > > I'd argue the most usual source of incorrect completions are different > options > in different upstream software releases - options etc get > added/removed/renamed all the time, and for many "same" commands there are > even different upstreams.
David changed gzip completion to parse gzip --help, so it's fixed now. > It's impossible to get everything right in every > possible scenario in a project like bash-completion, and thus I think the > project should focus on practical portability instead of strict "only > upstream" or strictly lowest common denominator policy. In my opinion > adding --rsyncable to gzip was practical based on checking the Linux distros > I have access to or otherwise looked at their sources (Fedora, CentOS, > openSUSE, Mandriva, Debian; all of these had --rsyncable). That's still a tiny subset of available distros, which is quite opposite to "practical portability". Gentoo, for example, hasn't --rsyncable option. I hope in the future we take the most generic approach (when possible), specially when talking about distro-specific options. That is, the lowest common denominator policy or automatic guessing. On some projects, bash-completion modules are shipped with upstream tarballs and maintained there, so people always have the correct version installed. I also hope we encourage this. > --suggests, --enhances support for rpm(8): these do not exist in rpm from > rpm.org, but I gather do exist in rpm from rpm5.org (different upstreams with > differing opinions which is the "official" rpm). As always, exceptions can be made. I can't comment on rpm case because it's totally alien for me. If there's a quick way to check if you have rpm from rpm.org or rpm5.org, that'd rock. Otherwise, you decide. Regards, -- Santiago Moisés Mola Jabber: [email protected] | GPG: AAD203B5
signature.asc
Description: Esta parte del mensaje está firmada digitalmente
_______________________________________________ Bash-completion-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/bash-completion-devel
