Re: zsh-3.1.1 on NetBSD patch & problems

[Richard Coleman <coleman@math.gatech.edu>]

> >Is that some kind of joke?  Does the phrase "backward compatibility" mean
> >anything to you?  Can we all agree a permanent moratorium on breaking
> >old code/scripts/login environments?
> 
> compctl is purely an interactive feature, so only the very freakiest
> scripts could possibly be affected by this.  Also, all the commands
> that had default compctls also have compctls set up in the example
> compctl list distributed with zsh -- in some cases, these are actually
> better compctls than the default.
> 
> I think that since backward compatibility is not a significant issue in
> this case, it is wise to use the cleaner behaviour, of no default
> compctls.

I don't think this is a matter of backward compatibility, but
more of a matter of creating a decent environment for new users.

I realize most people on this list probably have a large list
of compctl's, and override all the default ones.  But this
matter concerns new users rather than power users.  What do
we save by removing the default compctl's?  Maybe 100 bytes, and
a few micro-seconds of startup time.

Zsh should (by default) start in a usable state.  I hate tools that
require extensive customization before they are usable.  Let's not
take zsh down that path.

rc