Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@zsh.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
X-No-Archive: yes
List-Id: Zsh Workers List <zsh-workers.zsh.org>
List-Post: <mailto:zsh-workers@zsh.org>
List-Help: <mailto:zsh-workers-help@zsh.org>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.1 (2015-04-28) on f.primenet.com.au
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.1
X-AuditID: cbfec7f5-f792a6d000001302-8e-577b70d31379
Date: Tue, 05 Jul 2016 09:33:21 +0100
From: Peter Stephenson <p.stephenson@samsung.com>
To: Zsh Hackers' List <zsh-workers@zsh.org>
Subject: Re: Next release (5.3)
Message-id: <20160705093321.79d7c4bc@pwslap01u.europe.root.pri>
In-reply-to: <160704080424.ZM12848@torch.brasslantern.com>
References: <20160704114016.190f48be@pwslap01u.europe.root.pri>
 <160704080424.ZM12848@torch.brasslantern.com>
Organization: Samsung Cambridge Solution Centre
X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.9 (GTK+ 2.22.0; i386-redhat-linux-gnu)
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
X-Brightmail-Tracker:
 H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFrrALMWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsVy+t/xq7qXC6rDDW6c5bM42PyQyYHRY9XB
	D0wBjFFcNimpOZllqUX6dglcGZeOLGItmMhScebvQ/YGxjXMXYycHBICJhLXH/5mgrDFJC7c
	W8/WxcjFISSwlFFi68llrBDODCaJni+TGCGc04wS67YdhsqcASp7spUFpJ9FQFXi5NmpjCA2
	m4ChxNRNs4FsDg4RAW2J9o9iIGFhAXmJ/tZrbCA2r4C9xNHrx8BsTgEribWHj4CdISSQL7H9
	0wyw8/gF9CWu/v0EdZ69xMwrZxghegUlfky+B7aWWUBLYvO2JlYIW15i85q3zBBz1CVu3N3N
	PoFReBaSlllIWmYhaVnAyLyKUTS1NLmgOCk910ivODG3uDQvXS85P3cTIyScv+5gXHrM6hCj
	AAejEg9vwfyqcCHWxLLiytxDjBIczEoivHz51eFCvCmJlVWpRfnxRaU5qcWHGKU5WJTEeWfu
	eh8iJJCeWJKanZpakFoEk2Xi4JRqYDRblaIuV3Ba7/OFl3P5Cs8U5NnKJfG/uzt1x5RsWX1G
	36oSgW19ypYvNCacCr3T7mdZ4tN6+OWCqdvfdL2OLOvdcGRn4DmXfVblNpvdt8x69HzPni0+
	S7uEhG6Xn//k/qZ0ukPm/8X3Ljz2UNglYtobFzP7vNsM8XRzjnXJ3GITmfqUohKivyixFGck
	GmoxFxUnAgAX07KdYwIAAA==
X-Seq: zsh-workers 38794

On Mon, 04 Jul 2016 08:04:24 -0700
Bart Schaefer <schaefer@brasslantern.com> wrote:
> (1) Daniel's suggested change to :A [care to offer an opinion?]

I'd be vaguely inclined to make sure it does what the doc currently says
and leave it at that.  But that's only because I've not worked out a
case where I want anything different.  It's too difficult to come up
with a categorical answer because it depends whether the user is used to
CHASE_BLAH behaviour (I'm not suggesting option-specific behaviour,
either).

pws