bash completions

[Nicholas Bamber]

On 06/12/15 00:51, James McCoy wrote:

>> would rather not touch VCs-specific scripts
>> ===========================================
>
> That's fine.  We don't need complete coverage. :) If someone else is
> interested in it, they can do it.

Reflecting on it what I was picking up on here is that in the RFH bug 
report there is a comment about making the scripts more coherent. Well 
it strikes me that they are at their most incoherent in the VCS scripts. 
So I thought about it and then thought, "nah nah not for me".
If I am not willing to touch the code of a script, then I am not eager 
to look at the bash completion. More generally if someone actually wants 
to make them more coherent they have to come up with a vision of what 
that would look like and put a lot of work into it. Coherence is an 
indication of intelligent design not evolution. Just ask your appendix!

>> debrelease (err ...dput-ng?)
>
> Not sure what the parenthetical statement is supposed to mean.
>

The first point here is that now we have two completing packages "dput" 
and "dput-ng" and so debrelease presumably needs updating at least in 
the man page.

Secondly both rival packages provide "dcut" but neither provide bash 
completion, although WE do! That looks like a mess though I am not sure 
that the onus is on devscripts to clean that one up.