Hi Daniel, Daniel Shahaf wrote: > That's not to say that things can't be improved going forward.
The big question to me seems "how?". > […], or /etc/zsh/zshrc.d/ could be added (there's a separate ticket > for that but my quick grep didn't find it), You probably had https://bugs.debian.org/776663 in mind which has been filed against zsh-common, not zsh (but src:zsh), so I suspect you haven't it found because of that. There's also an Ubuntu bug report on a similar topic at https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/zsh/+bug/1800280 which is specifically about parsing /etc/profile, i.e. the same file bash parses. > Indeed, this ticket seems a bit open-ended. What's being asked > here? Ack! And JFTR: I actually don't have an opinion on this, either, as I'm too far away from knowing the non-debian conventions. I'd though would like to see a consensus inside the Debian Zsh team on how (and where) to go forward. I'd especially would be happy to hear about Frank's (Cc'ed) opinion as he and Daniel are those who are most clued about upstream things and especially upstream conventions. (And because I know that Frank has a quite clear opinion on #776663 — where I actually do have an opinion, too, albeit a different one than Frank.) Joey: I re-added the actual bug report title to the subject to make it clear about what topic the discussion is. Regards, Axel -- ,''`. | Axel Beckert <a...@debian.org>, https://people.debian.org/~abe/ : :' : | Debian Developer, ftp.ch.debian.org Admin `. `' | 4096R: 2517 B724 C5F6 CA99 5329 6E61 2FF9 CD59 6126 16B5 `- | 1024D: F067 EA27 26B9 C3FC 1486 202E C09E 1D89 9593 0EDE