Am 02.08.2013 13:20, schrieb Romain Francoise:
The first has-session is right. The second is wrong, IMO.
In the context of has-session I agree that it's probably wrong, yes.
Definitely. :)
Now, as it can be nice to be lazy, and it would change for everyone,
it would probably be nice to make the "exact match only" for session
handling optional, like having an extra parameter to all commands
that
deal with sessions. (Plus something for tmux.conf, I guess, so one
can
set it globally)..
I'm not sure we need it for all commands, but I'll see what upstream
thinks about this.
Well, from looking at it, I think there are lots of commands where one
wants
it to be using the exact session, and the list below only looking at
those
directly session related. If you go further, you will find many more
where
there can be interesting effects if the session is matched and not used
exactly,
say list-windows followed by some kill-window.
Though you can get around this by (a fixed) has-session check before
actually
using list-windows.
has-session
detach-client
kill-session
list-session
lock-session
new-session (for grouping)
rename-session
switch-client
All of those have more than a little possibility to go wrong with
matching a
session name. Lock the wrong one, kill the wrong one, group a new
session with
another you didn't want to, ...
Thanks for forwarding it to the right place upstream.
--
bye Joerg
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
