bash-completion: add git-prune into bash completion

[johnlinp]

Sometimes git would suggest the user to run git prune when there are
too many unreachable loose objects. It's more user-friendly if we add
git-prune into bash completion.

Signed-off-by: John Lin johnlinp@gmail.com

Fixes #642.

[johnlinp]

/submit

[gitgitgadget]

Submitted as pull.667.git.1592784835441.gitgitgadget@gmail.com

[gitgitgadget]

On the Git mailing list, Junio C Hamano wrote (reply to this):

"John Lin via GitGitGadget" <gitgitgadget@gmail.com> writes:

> From: John Lin <johnlinp@gmail.com>
>
> Sometimes git would suggest the user to run `git prune` when there are
> too many unreachable loose objects. It's more user-friendly if we add
> git-prune into bash completion.

Yes, but it does not suggest all the time, and there is a reason.
Most of the time "gc" is more appropriate, but there are narrow
cases where "prune" is more appropriate and that is when the users
will see suggestion to run "prune".

Isn't it too much to type p-r-u-n-e while seeing that message,
typing as you read it?

I do not think it hurts to complete "git prune", in the sense that
we would want to avoid completing potentially destructive operation
to those who do not understand the implications, because the command
is pretty much benign.  But I am not sure it forces users to type
too many keystrokes too frequently that it requires a tab
completion.  I dunno.

Will queue for now.

Thanks.

[gitgitgadget]

This branch is now known as jl/complete-git-prune.

[gitgitgadget]

This patch series was integrated into pu via git@81c2a7a.

[gitgitgadget]

This patch series was integrated into seen via git@d6ee617.

[gitgitgadget]

This patch series was integrated into seen via git@5af2bf7.

[gitgitgadget]

This patch series was integrated into seen via git@36bd151.

[gitgitgadget]

This patch series was integrated into next via git@64f30b8.

[gitgitgadget]

This patch series was integrated into seen via git@a03ec38.

[gitgitgadget]

This patch series was integrated into seen via git@7d338cb.

[gitgitgadget]

This patch series was integrated into seen via git@65ffaca.

[gitgitgadget]

This patch series was integrated into next via git@65ffaca.

[gitgitgadget]

This patch series was integrated into master via git@65ffaca.

[gitgitgadget]

Closed via 65ffaca.

[gitgitgadget]

On the Git mailing list, 林自均 wrote (reply to this):

Hi Junio,

I saw this integrated into master. Thanks.

Best,
John Lin

Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> 於 2020年6月23日 週二 上午2:28寫道：
>
> "John Lin via GitGitGadget" <gitgitgadget@gmail.com> writes:
>
> > From: John Lin <johnlinp@gmail.com>
> >
> > Sometimes git would suggest the user to run `git prune` when there are
> > too many unreachable loose objects. It's more user-friendly if we add
> > git-prune into bash completion.
>
> Yes, but it does not suggest all the time, and there is a reason.
> Most of the time "gc" is more appropriate, but there are narrow
> cases where "prune" is more appropriate and that is when the users
> will see suggestion to run "prune".
>
> Isn't it too much to type p-r-u-n-e while seeing that message,
> typing as you read it?
>
> I do not think it hurts to complete "git prune", in the sense that
> we would want to avoid completing potentially destructive operation
> to those who do not understand the implications, because the command
> is pretty much benign.  But I am not sure it forces users to type
> too many keystrokes too frequently that it requires a tab
> completion.  I dunno.
>
> Will queue for now.
>
> Thanks.

[gitgitgadget]

On the Git mailing list, Junio C Hamano wrote (reply to this):

林自均 <johnlinp@gmail.com> writes:

> Hi Junio,
>
> I saw this integrated into master. Thanks.

Thank you for writing the patch.