Re: [PATCH/RFC] Add support for the google-chrome web browser

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Jan 5, 2010, 18:39 UTC
Message-ID: <7v8wccz99g.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
In-Reply-To: <32541b131001050920j2a569ec8u8811f1b0358f21ef@mail.gmail.com>

Avery Pennarun <apenwarr@gmail.com> writes:

Show 10 quoted lines

> On Tue, Jan 5, 2010 at 12:40 AM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
>> Then we don't even have to add any specific support for "google-chrome" or
>> anything that takes "$command $path..." and opens the documents.
>>
>> Is there a downside in this approach?
>
> If someone has another firefox-derived browser installed with a
> different name and tries to use it, this default wouldn't do the right
> "firefoxy" thing, and would instead fail strangely.  On the other
> hand, right now it'll fail anyway, just not strangely.

You probably didn't notice/understand why I singled out w3m/links/open and excluded firefox from the set. There is no question that the ones that need custom command line need custom support. But to support a new browser that takes a bog standard "command then args" command line, there is no reason to add cruft, every time somebody comes up with a new browser.