Jonathan Nieder wrote: >> On Sat, May 5, 2012 at 5:54 PM, Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> Following a convention similar to the bash-completion project's >>> proposed future convention doesn't really help compatibility. If we >>> want to be able to include this function in that project without >>> change some day, we'd have to call it _BC_git_complete. :) [...] > Please read again. "If we want to be able to include this ...". I > assume we do not, but that would be the reason to follow their > convention to the letter. Quick clarification: I actually think it would be nice to make it easy to pass maintenance of the git completion script to that project if automatic option discovery means changes to the script settle down or if we have less time to work on it some day. Unfortunately, the proposed namespace rules[1] (I didn't think the change had happened or been set in stone yet?) would not make that easy. Oh well. [1] http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.shells.bash.completion.scm/2013/focus=3158 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html