From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 2004 invoked by alias); 6 May 2011 00:05:10 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@zsh.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes List-Id: Zsh Workers List List-Post: List-Help: X-Seq: 29162 Received: (qmail 12796 invoked from network); 6 May 2011 00:05:08 -0000 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on f.primenet.com.au X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 Received-SPF: none (ns1.primenet.com.au: domain at closedmail.com does not designate permitted sender hosts) From: Bart Schaefer Message-id: <110505170503.ZM20139@torch.brasslantern.com> Date: Thu, 05 May 2011 17:05:02 -0700 In-reply-to: Comments: In reply to Felipe Contreras "Re: When can we make a compromise in Git completion?" (May 6, 2:01am) References: <110505153721.ZM20011@torch.brasslantern.com> X-Mailer: OpenZMail Classic (0.9.2 24April2005) To: Felipe Contreras Subject: Re: When can we make a compromise in Git completion? Cc: zsh-workers@zsh.org MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii On May 6, 2:01am, Felipe Contreras wrote: } Subject: Re: When can we make a compromise in Git completion? } } On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 1:37 AM, Bart Schaefer wrote: } > zstyle ':completion::complete:git:*:files' command ... } } I don't think it would be that easy. } } I believe every __git_.*_files has to be changed. So again, not that easy. Then you haven't actually looked. Nearly all __git*files are wrappers around __git_files, and __git_files is the only [*] place where ls-files is used, and that zstyle will swap out that call for whatever you say should be used instead; or you can replace __git_files and interpret directly the arguments that it's given. Maybe __git_tree_files also needs to avoid ls-tree, but in that case there's also zstyle ':completion::complete:git:*:tree-files' command ... [*] This modulo the fact that Nikolai's patch missed a couple of cases that still want to refer to __git_files_relative, which we haven't yet come up with a fix for. } This has nothing to do with feelings, it's a technical issue. Either } you are willing to make a compromise or not. } } You pointed to other mailing list customs earlier, well, on the linux } kernel mailing list politeness is not a requisite, Politeness isn't necessarily a requisite here, either, but the content of remarks should at least move the discussion forward. If you're not actively helping the process, being impolite isn't going to convince someone else to do it for you. } code is: "talk is cheap, show me the code". ... and have you ...? } But what I hear you saying is; "we don't want that code". } } It is a simple question, why can't you give a straight answer? Because whether we want the code depends on what we see once you show it to us. Especially within in the completion system, functions are provided by those who are interested enough to want to use them. Code can be offered as contributions and may or may not be accepted. MOST of the time, it is accepted, but if this isn't an interesting or useful (to *you*) project even if we turn you down, there's not much more I can say to you. I personally have reached the end of giving advice on how to proceed, at least until there's something more specific to dicuss. --