From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <zsh-workers-return-9135-mason-zsh=primenet.com.au@sunsite.auc.dk>
Received: (qmail 11844 invoked from network); 22 Dec 1999 13:20:47 -0000
Received: from sunsite.auc.dk (130.225.51.30)
  by ns1.primenet.com.au with SMTP; 22 Dec 1999 13:20:47 -0000
Received: (qmail 27397 invoked by alias); 22 Dec 1999 13:20:42 -0000
Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@sunsite.auc.dk; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
X-No-Archive: yes
X-Seq: 9135
Received: (qmail 27390 invoked from network); 22 Dec 1999 13:20:42 -0000
Subject: Re: PATCH: alias modules
In-Reply-To: <E120Xt0-0000Xp-00.1999-12-21-22-36-06@mail3.svr.pol.co.uk> from
 Peter Stephenson at "Dec 21, 1999 10:37:21 pm"
To: Peter Stephenson <pws@pwstephenson.fsnet.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 13:20:37 +0000 (GMT)
CC: Zsh hackers list <zsh-workers@sunsite.auc.dk>
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL65 (25)]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <E120lgz-0002Dr-00@crucigera.fysh.org>
From: Zefram <zefram@fysh.org>

Peter Stephenson wrote:
>The way I suggested, you can decide by yourself very easily which names
>are to exist without the zsh/ prefix.

We'd still have to decide what the default set of aliases is.  Making the
user decide which are to be aliased defeats the point: if the user is
aware of the need for aliases then they are aware of the new names,
and in that case they can just use the new names anyway.

-zefram