https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=387705
--- Comment #6 from Nate Graham ---
Excellent news!
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=387705
--- Comment #5 from Dominik Haumann ---
I am in favor of PKGBUILD*. Will change this this weekend. I believe this is
still ok and the risk of false positives is pretty low.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=387705
--- Comment #4 from Ashark ---
I understand that. The problems could be if somebody calls their file like
"PKGBUILD instructions.txt".
Maybe better instead of "PKGBUILD*" rule make "PKGBUILD-*". It should reduce
unwanted behavior cases.
By the way, I ha
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=387705
--- Comment #3 from Nate Graham ---
We could conceivably change PKGBUILD to PKGBUILD*, but that might have
unforeseen negative ramifications.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=387705
Nate Graham changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||pointedst...@zoho.com
--
You are receiving this
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=387705
--- Comment #2 from Ashark ---
I am amazed how quickly this wish was handled. Thank you!
Actually, naming like PKGBUILD-something is not a standard convention but just
something that I am doing. Standard name is just "PKGBUILD".
But it is very convinien
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=387705
--- Comment #1 from Dominik Haumann ---
Highlighting for PKGBUILD was added on 2017-11-26, see
https://phabricator.kde.org/D9002
Is naming PKGBUILD-something a standard convention or just something you are
doing?
--
You are receiving this mail becaus
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=387705
Ashark changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ash...@linuxcomp.ru
--
You are receiving this mail be
