Re: [PATCH] better systemctl completion

[Peter Stephenson <Peter.Stephenson@xxxxxxx>]

On Mon, 24 Oct 2011 20:45:58 +0200
Frank Terbeck <ft@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Peter Stephenson wrote:
> [...]
> > Sorry, my mistake.  I'll apply the patch.
> [...]
> 
> Um. The file got a new licence as GPLv3 ("# This file is released under
> the GPLv3.").

Certainly that's better avoided, it does complicate matters.  We
wouldn't be able to do that if it were part of the main shell without
repercussions (we already have to be careful if the shell gets linked
against GDBM).  I don't think it has particular issues in the case
of individual completion functions --- though if they became part of the
library rather than the top level that would then affect the rest of the
completion functions.

Given that it's partly based on the bash systemctl completion you can
argue it's inevitable in this case.

Note the zsh licence already says "any provisions made in individual
files take precedence" so it does provide for the general case (though
this case is particularly complicated).

-- 
Peter Stephenson <pws@xxxxxxx>            Software Engineer
Tel: +44 (0)1223 692070                   Cambridge Silicon Radio Limited
Churchill House, Cambridge Business Park, Cowley Road, Cambridge, CB4 0WZ, UK



Member of the CSR plc group of companies. CSR plc registered in England and Wales, registered number 4187346, registered office Churchill House, Cambridge Business Park, Cowley Road, Cambridge, CB4 0WZ, United Kingdom
More information can be found at www.csr.com. Follow CSR on Twitter at http://twitter.com/CSR_PLC and read our blog at www.csr.com/blog