Hi Guillem, Apologies for the slow reply — work has been keeping me busy these past few weeks.
I see the transfer has landed in the meantime: bash-completion deprecated its dpkg completions, and the import plus the dpkg-source rework are now on dpkg main. Nice! Since scripts/completion/bash/ only has dpkg-source so far, I'd like to take dpkg-buildpackage as discussed — bash only, following the style and layout of the dpkg-source file on main. If you've already started on it locally, sorry for the delay, just tell me and I'll pick another program instead. Would you prefer a merge request on Salsa, or a patch to this bug? Best regards, Cheng Li Guillem Jover <[email protected]> 于2026年6月2日周二 11:32写道： > Hi! > > On Tue, 2026-05-19 at 18:21:32 +0800, Cheng Li wrote: > > I'm new to Debian contribution and came across this bug via the > > `newcomer` tag. Before I write anything, two quick questions so I > > don't duplicate or conflict with the upstream bash-completion > > integration you mentioned (pu/merge-bash-completions / > > scop/bash-completion#694): > > I've now submitted an MR to bash-completion upstream to be able to > unblock this and take over the completions in dpkg, which I'd be > planning on doing for 1.23.8, where I'm refreshing the > pu/merge-bash-completions branch, which I'll try to update tomorrow > or so. > > > 1. Is dpkg-buildpackage completion still open for an outside > > contribution, > > Sure thing! For bash sure, for zsh I see that this is already > provided by zsh upstream (but I'm not sure how up-to-date it is). > > > or has it been absorbed into your upstream work > > since then? > > I've not added anything new relative to bash-completion upstream, > but would consider starting to work on bash-completion improvements > and additions once the transfer has been coordinate. Let me know if > you'd like to start on any program and I'll hold off on those. I'm > unlikely to work on zsh as I don't use it, but I'm happy to merge > zsh completions. > > > 2. If still open, would you prefer the initial patch to add a zsh > > completion only (matching the existing `_dpkg-parsechangelog` > > style under `scripts/completion/zsh/`), or bash + zsh together? > > Given what I mention above that zsh already ships completions for it, > I think bash-only would be easiest, as I'm not sure what's zsh stance > on where they prefer to maintain these. But if you or someone else > would like to check how an ownership transfer could be done from zsh > to dpkg, although that might imply rewriting the zsh completion from > scratch (clean room etc) to avoid having to use the Zsh license in > dpkg, then I'd be happy to merge such new completions. > > So from my PoV, both would be ideal, but feel free to work on the ones > you are most interested in. In case you work on bash completions, > please make use of the new bash-completion 2.12 APIs (but not later). > > Thanks, > Guillem > -- Best regards Cheng Li
