Re: [PATCH] completion: restore 'remote rm'

From

KSKeith Smiley <k@keith.so>

Date

Dec 29, 2017, 16:49 UTC

Message-ID

<20171229164949.GA48812@bryant.local>

In-Reply-To

<20171229135240.GQ3693@zaya.teonanacatl.net>

Updated:

Signed-off-by: Keith Smiley <k@keith.so>
---
 contrib/completion/git-completion.bash | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/contrib/completion/git-completion.bash b/contrib/completion/git-completion.bash
index 3683c772c5586..3e9044087e6ba 100644
--- a/contrib/completion/git-completion.bash
+++ b/contrib/completion/git-completion.bash
@@ -2665,7 +2665,7 @@ _git_config ()
 _git_remote ()
 {
 	local subcommands="
-		add rename remove set-head set-branches
+		add rename remove rm set-head set-branches
 		get-url set-url show prune update
 		"
 	local subcommand="$(__git_find_on_cmdline "$subcommands")"

--
Keith Smiley

On 12/29, Todd Zullinger wrote:
>Keith Smiley wrote:
>> It looks like that was just about preferring remove in documentation
>> and the like, I think it would still make sense to have both for
>> completion since rm is still supported.
>
>I read it as a first step in a long process to eventually
>remove 'remote rm', but if that's never intended, then sure,
>restoring completion for it seems reasonable.
>
>It would be good to hear from those who know or recall the
>intention.
>
>I think we should only complete the preferred subcommand.
>That encourages use of 'remote remove' even if 'remote rm'
>will stay forever to avoid breaking existing scripts.
>
>If it does make sense to restore completion, adding a link
>back to e17dba8fe1 and explaining why the completion is
>being restored would be good.  Reading the commit message
>now makes it sound like 'remote rm' was never present and is
>being added to correct an oversight.
>
>Maybe something like:
>
>    completion: restore 'remote rm'
>
>    e17dba8fe1 ("remote: prefer subcommand name 'remove' to
>    'rm'", 2012-09-06) removed the 'rm' subcommand from
>    completion.  The 'remote rm' subcommand is still supported
>    and not planned to be removed.  Offer completions for it.
>
>I also noticed that in your original commit that you say
>"list of removes as remove does." That should be "remotes"
>instead of "removes" there. -- I've made that typo myself
>quite often. :)
>
>-- 
>Todd
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>There are no stupid questions, but there are a LOT of inquisitive
>idiots.
>    -- Demotivators (www.despair.com)
>