* Bruce Stephens [2002-04- 3 23:05:47 +0100]: > I think you misunderstand: compctl is obsoleted by the new completion > system, and the new completion system is one file per command > (roughly, anyway), so it's naturally easy for people to submit > completions for new commands---they just provide a new file. Woops, your right...ok, I said I was a newbie but I didn't think it was that bad. Yes, you're right. So that changes my original question to: Can/should we have a file for compctl recipes, and then a directory containing the files for the stuff made with the new system? Oh, and to the people who wrote me privately, pointing out that compctl is strongly deprecated in favor of the new system, that it sucks, etc etc...yes, I know this, I wasn't suggesting we advocate using it. All I meant was that if a recipe exists for compctl and hasn't been ported to the new system yet, we should still include it unless using both systems at once is impossible and/or a huge resource hit. So now that I'm up to speed on what's going on with the two completion systems, my next project is to inspect the "onboard" completion directories to see how many of my current compctl recipes are duplicated there. I should be able to have a starting point soon... -- john@io.com