Hi, On Thu, Sep 17, 2015 at 11:01:01 +0200, Ondrej Zajicek wrote: [...] > > 1. Is this useful? Hopefully. > > If you think this is a studpid idea, pleas explain! > > I am not sure if stderr should be used even in interactive mode, but that > is hopefully harmless.
We could add some "!interactive && " to the conditionals, if absolutely needed. But IMHO interactive tools are also allowed to use stderr. > > 2. Should this be the default (in an upcoming version)? > > I don't know, how many non humans depend on *all* output > > going to stdout and neglect stderr? > > Probably in the next major version. That means 1.6? Will you keep the patch in your "for 1.6" queue? > > 3. If the answer to (2) is "Need backward compatibility": > > Do we need some --enable-stderr then? > > That seems unnecessary. Good. Overloading options isn't really a good thing. So good! Cheers Christian -- www.cosmokey.com
