Re: Good, easy to use, upstream defaults for zsh (i.e. improving usability)

[Nikolai Weibull <mailing-lists.zsh-workers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Travis Spencer wrote:

> On Mon, Jul 11, 2005 at 05:44:39PM +0200, Nikolai Weibull wrote:

> > I hear what you're trying to do, but a Z-shell isn't a fish (wow,
> > that was a horrible pun),

> I am with Keir on this one.  A large minority of the sys admins at my
> school use zsh.  In an effort to make converting easier they provide a
> pretty usable default environment.  When I first logged in, I was
> like, "What they heck!  This thing is totally broken.  Why is this
> doing such and such?  Where is such and such?"  Once I figured out
> what they where doing, I just added *one* new option to my .zshenv:
> 
> setopt NO_GLOBAL_RCS
> 
> Done deal.  Now new zsh-converts get a usable environment that they
> can choose to customize or simply use as is, and I'm happy because
> none of their stuff effects me.

I really don't understand what you're trying to say here.  Are you
saying that defaults are hard to get right, as the ones that were being
set messed up your environment and made Zsh work in a way that you
didn't expect it to, to the point that you had to use the word "heck"?
Why do you think that the defaults that are being set are going to make
life easier for Zsh-converts?

The global RCs shouldn't really be doing very much anyway, in my
opinion.  On my system they set ZDOTDIR and a default PATH, that's about
it.  I do agree that having completion set up properly by default would
make Zsh a lot more appealing at first glance, but completion can be
quite difficult to set up to a default that suits the largest number of
converters,
        nikolai

-- 
Nikolai Weibull: now available free of charge at http://bitwi.se/!
Born in Chicago, IL USA; currently residing in Gothenburg, Sweden.
main(){printf(&linux["\021%six\012\0"],(linux)["have"]+"fun"-97);}