Am 11.10.2019 um 22:05 hat Cleber Rosa geschrieben: > On Fri, Oct 11, 2019 at 02:27:25PM +0300, Nir Soffer wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 11, 2019, 12:36 Kevin Wolf <kw...@redhat.com> wrote: > > > > > Am 09.10.2019 um 21:47 hat Cleber Rosa geschrieben: > > > > Due to not being able to find a reason to have shebangs on files that > > > > are not executable. > > > > > > > > While at it, add a mode hint to emacs, which would be clueless or > > > > plain wrong about these containing shell code. > > > > > > vim still doesn't like the change. > > > > > > Of course, we could also add another line for vim and for every other > > > editor in use, but actually, I think I'd prefer just dropping this > > > patch. It even makes each file a few bytes larger instead of saving > > > something. Shebang lines are a shorter and more portable format > > > indicator than the alternatives. > > > > > > So I think in the end we have found a good reason to keep them. :-) > > > > What about .sh suffix? Should be most portable way. > > That's the approach I tend to follow for my sh code. Explicit is > better than implicit if you ask me.
I would certainly agree for new files. > Kevin, > > Do you have any strong feelings here? I'd be fine with either this > or dropping the patch. No strong feelings. The result of renaming the files would be a bit nicer than what we have today, but renaming always comes with a cost when working with the version history later. Hard to tell if it's a net gain or loss in the end. Myself, I would probably pick the lazy way and stick with "if it ain't broke, don't fix it", but I'm not objecting to a change either. Kevin