Re: [PATCH] Add shell completion for git remote rm

[Keith Smiley <k@keith.so>]

So it sounds like either we should deprecate rm, or I should update the patch to the suggested method where we just complete remotes, but not rm in the list of completions.

Thoughts?

-- 
Keith Smiley

On Wed, Jan 3, 2018, at 11:24, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com> writes:
> 
> > On Sat, Dec 30 2017, Todd Zullinger jotted:
> >
> >> And I think that should also apply to
> >> not offering completion for commands/subcommands/options
> >> which are only kept for backward compatibility.
> >
> > Yeah I think it makes sense to at some point stop completing things if
> > we're going to remove stuff, if we decide to remove it.
> >
> >> Here's one way to make 'git remote rm <TAB>' work without
> >> including it in the output of 'git remote <TAB>':
> >>
> >> diff --git i/contrib/completion/git-completion.bash w/contrib/completion/git-completion.bash
> >> index 3683c772c5..aa63f028ab 100644
> >> --- i/contrib/completion/git-completion.bash
> >> +++ w/contrib/completion/git-completion.bash
> >> @@ -2668,7 +2668,9 @@ _git_remote ()
> >>  		add rename remove set-head set-branches
> >>  		get-url set-url show prune update
> >>  		"
> >> -	local subcommand="$(__git_find_on_cmdline "$subcommands")"
> >> +	# Don't advertise rm by including it in subcommands, but complete
> >> +	# remotes if it is used.
> >> +	local subcommand="$(__git_find_on_cmdline "$subcommands rm")"
> >>  	if [ -z "$subcommand" ]; then
> >>  		case "$cur" in
> >>  		--*)
> >
> > Neat!
> 
> Yes, indeed it is nice.
> 
>