----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jun Aruga" <jaruga(a)redhat.com>
> To: "Ruby SIG mailing list" <ruby-sig(a)lists.fedoraproject.org>
> Sent: Monday, March 20, 2017 6:46:37 PM
> Subject: Re: Ruby optparser bash completion support
>
> I could understand it.
> That is the reason I said "But it's up to you.".
>
> Jun
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Vít Ondruch" <vondruch(a)redhat.com>
>> To: ruby-sig(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>> Sent: Monday, March 20, 2017 6:13:51 PM
>> Subject: Re: Ruby optparser bash completion support
>>
>>
>>
>> Dne 20.3.2017 v 17:20 Jun Aruga napsal(a):
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>>> Should we store the "rb_optparse.bash" somewhere?
>>> It does not matter for me.
>>>
>>> If we provide it, there is a sample in python3 package.
>>>
>>>
http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/rpms/python3.git/tree/python3.spec
>> This was more rhetoric/abstrac question, because we don't need to use
>> the rb_optparse functionality directly.
>>
>>>> L1467 %doc Misc/README.valgrind Misc/valgrind-python.supp Misc/gdbinit
>>> "Misc" (camel case) is python's directory habit. we should use
"misc"
>>> instead of that.
>>>
>>> The package name might be "ruby-misc" or "ruby-tools", or
including
>>> "ruby-devel", and etc..
>>>
>>> misc/
>>> rb_optparse.bash
>>> rb_optparse.zsh
>>> *.el (emacs macro)
>>>
>>>> Should we try to enable the bash completion for every Ruby executable?
>>>> Should we have some macro for this?
>>> No, "rb_optparse.bash" are not installed when I installed Ruby
from
>>> source
>>> with default configure option.
>>> That means that using the file is not common.
>> Well, it is not common because it is not widely known. And we are
>> working on distribution, we know our platform and we have means to
>> provide better integration and user experience.
>>
>> Actually, now I realize that I was not precise enough saying "for every
>> Ruby executable" when I actually assumed executables provided by our
>> packages. But on the other hand, I would love to see this used for every
>> Ruby executable if possible. Why not (except from technical issues,
>> which can be resolved typically)?
>>
>>
>> Vít
>>
>>> But it's up to you.
>>>
>>> Jun Aruga
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>> From: "Vít Ondruch" <vondruch(a)redhat.com>
>>>> To: "Ruby SIG mailing list"
<ruby-sig(a)lists.fedoraproject.org>
>>>> Sent: Monday, March 20, 2017 3:39:00 PM
>>>> Subject: Ruby optparser bash completion support
>>>>
>>>> Hi all,
>>>>
>>>> For ages, there is Bash/Zsh completion support available for the default
>>>> OptParser [1]. That means quite some Ruby application could provide some
>>>> basic command completion out of the box. However, the setup is a bit
>>>> clumsy. The steps necessary to enable the command completion for single
>>>> executable are described her [2]. Any ideas, how we could benefit from
>>>> this feature? Should we store the "rb_optparse.bash" somewhere?
Where to
>>>> load it and how to enable the completion for specific executables?
>>>> Should we try to enable the bash completion for every Ruby executable?
I am not sure if I can be of any help, since I am using zsh on my systems(with oh-my-zsh
to by precise) and I have autocompletion done by some zsh plugin(s) AFAIK[1].
And it works really nice for `gem`, `vagrant`, apart from one issue.
The issue occurs when I write `gem unpack ` and then want to select some file by
auto-completion(at that point there's no autocompletion at all). Also if I install
`jekyll` f.e. there is no autocompletion too, so I guess it's working only for
selected executables.
Personally I would like to have system-wide autocompletion. But for start we could at
least ship it and let users know how to enable it system-wide, or for specific
packages(with some `-autocompletion` package f.e.).
>>>> Should we have some macro for this?
I think it would be best if the autocompletion is done(prepared) for a packager
seamlessly.
HIH,
Pavel
[1]
https://github.com/robbyrussell/oh-my-zsh/tree/master/plugins/gem