Re: [PATCH v2] completion: add new git_complete helper

From: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>
Date: Apr 17, 2012, 08:06 UTC
Message-ID: <20120417080622.GF20017@burratino>
In-Reply-To: <CAMP44s3mnnhKXHUEMSX+d2L2Jyqr9_Q7F=3DvWb4MKxHpTRREg@mail.gmail.com>

Felipe Contreras wrote:

> Sure, it would be nice to follow bash_completion project's convention
> for these kinds of functions, if they had any, and might be useful to
> ask them what they think. But we don't *have* to. And nobody is
> arguing that we should ask them. Right? Or are you?

No, I really am not arguing that we should ask them. Because we (or at least I) already know at least what their convention was a few years ago. However, I do encourage anyone curious to ask them instead of making up arguments about why the answer is obvious.

[...]

> But throwing arguments on the air, and they get angry when they get
> counter-argued is not helpful. If we are going to discuss, lets
> discuss, but that doesn't seem to be what you want. You want me to
> blindly use the name you propose without saying a word?

I do not think it is fair to call your position blind. I really would be happier if you were able to listen, and, instead of throwing out protests and debating points, to talk about your real concerns.

I am guessing (but you never said!) that you find the name __git_complete ugly. That's fine. I even agree. I have mentioned that there is a namespace that your proposed alternative violates. Your response is... to refuse to believe that what I said is true or relevant?

How am I supposed to have a reasonable discussion after that?

This is not a debating floor. When I give what I think is relevant information, I am not requesting "please misinterpret me and shoot me down".

Ciao, Jonathan