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

[Keith Smiley <k@keith.so>]

Since there hasn't been any movement on the alternative solutions mentioned here, would it be reasonable to accept this patch in the meantime?


--
Keith Smiley

> On Jan 17, 2018, at 01:48, Duy Nguyen <pclouds@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 1:17 PM, Kevin Daudt <me@ikke.info> wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 07:44:19AM +0700, Duy Nguyen wrote:
>>> PS. This also makes me thing about supporting subcommand aliases, so
>>> that people can add back 'git remote rm' if they like (or something
>>> like 'git r rm' when they alias 'remote' as well). Which is probably a
>>> good thing to do. Long command names are fine when you have completion
>>> support, they are a pain to type otherwise.
>>> 
>> 
>> Couldn't they just create an alias like git rrm then, if they use it so
>> often that it becomes an issue?
> 
> They could. The only exception that may not work is if they want to
> insert some options between "r" and "rm". Sometimes option positions
> matter. Anyway this is just thinking out loud, maybe we don't really
> need it until people scream about it with a valid use case
> 
>> Having another layer of aliases does create a lot of complexity.
> 
> Yes. It's partly the reason I wanted this actually ;-) Many commands
> have gained subcommands nowadays but there's no shared infrastructure
> for managing these subcommands. By adding something that works across
> the board at subcommand level I'm forced to "fix" this (or probably
> never get to do the sub-aliasing because this "fix" takes forever).
> -- 
> Duy