Re: [Ranger-users] let's discuss commands.py

[Miodrag Milic]

On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 09:03:00PM +0100, Roman Z. wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 07:37:53PM +0100, Miodrag Milic wrote:
> > use "imports" at the end of those 4 files that will call adequate
> > files from ~/.config/ranger folder.
> 
> That's already working for rc.conf and commands.py.  You can have a
> minimalistic rc.conf with only something like "map q quit!" and it's
> simply loaded on top of the default config.

I didn't know this. Why do we have copy config then at all ? It would
make more sense to have ranger arugment create-config which creates
empty config files with adequate names in adequate user directory, and
also provide soft link to examples.

 
> I'd argue that it makes no sense for scope.sh (it's a shell script) and
> rifle.conf (it's also like a script; rifle goes through the file
> line-by-line and looks for the first match).

I couldn't say, I didn't use them so far.


> > What do you think about removing copy-all option completely and use
> > "imports" at the end of those 4 files that will call adequate files from
> > ~/.config/ranger folder. Those files should be empty initially.
> > 
> > So user config/code will be separated from default config/code, and updates
> > will sometimes require some tweaks to user files when compatibility breaks
> > which could be announced at ranger startup as an warning.
> >
> > You could even provide soft links to those 4 "default config" files along
> > which will serve only for easy of access.
> 
> Using symlinks to create stuff like "~/.config/ranger/rc.conf.example"
> would be nice because this keeps them up to date at all times, but if
> somebody edits them, he would change the actual default configs and
> potentially mess things up bad.

So add BIG warning at the top of the file in the comment, there is no
reason to edit it anyway. 

But if ".example" is used as default, isn't it better to name it
".default" ?