Re: PATCH: update completions for procps 3.3.16

["Daniel Shahaf" <d.s@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Oliver Kiddle wrote on Sun, 07 Feb 2021 01:48 +00:00:
> I'm not keen on tracking these versions in comments in the completion
> files themself because updating the comment everytime there's a new
> release that doesn't add options would get silly.

I don't see the problem.  If you review procps 3.3.17 and find that it
_doesn't_ add new options, that'd be useful information to share with
other maintainers of the procps completion, so as to avoid duplication
of work.

Right there at the top of the file seems like the best place for the
version number datum, because that way there is no atomicity problem
when updating the completion.  Recording that datum in the log message,
as this patch does, means there's no way to update the datum without
making a dummy change to the file (Git's data model can't represent
"Commit X touched ./foo but didn't change it").

The usual argument against churn is that any change risks causing
a regression or disrupting future git-blame(1) or git-bisect(1) work.
These concerns don't seem to apply to version number comments.

All that said, you're doing the work so it's your decision.

Cheers,

Daniel