On Thu, Jan 16, 2020 at 05:28:49PM +0000, Stuart Henderson wrote: > On 2020/01/16 18:05, Paco Esteban wrote: > > Hi Edd, > > > > On Thu, 16 Jan 2020, Edd Barrett wrote: > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > This diff packages the necessary support files for for integrating fzf > > > with shells. > > > > > > With this change, enabling support in (e.g.) zsh is as simple as: > > > > > > ``` > > > export FZF_DEFAULT_OPTS="--ansi" > > > . /usr/local/share/fzf/shell/key-bindings.zsh > > > . /usr/local/share/fzf/shell/completion.zsh > > > ``` > > > > > > OK? > > > > On Nov 28, Aaron Bieber sent a patch to update fzf that included > > something similar, but it was never imported: > > > > https://marc.info/?l=openbsd-ports&m=157496223810600&w=2 > > > > I've been using it since with no issues. You may want to take a look > > (he did not put the files in the same place). > > > > Cheers, > > > > -- > > Paco Esteban. > > 5818130B8A6DBC03 > > > > We have standard locations for bash/zsh completion files, not every > port uses them but the majority do and it would probably make sense to > do the same here: > > /usr/local/share/bash-completion/completions > /usr/local/share/zsh/vendor-completions > > There's no equivalent for key-bindings though.
vendor-completions is a Debianism that has escaped into upstreams. The Debian reason for the additional folder is site-functions is fully under admin control (like /usr/local for them). Likewise they prefer upstreams use site-functions (so make install'd completers end up in the user controled location) and packages should move the completer to vendor-completions. I think we should use site-functions rather than vendor-completions. This is the zsh upstream supported way. The alternative is to have patches move completers from site-functions to vendor-completions and a patch in shells/zsh to add vendor-completions to the default fpath. These patches should never be merged upstream, so I'm not a fan of it (but it's what Debian does).
