> You did not mention a word about scripting.
WTF. Literally right there in my first comment:
> Of course, grep still has a POSIX compliant base. And so long as your scripts only rely on that POSIX compliant base (no -a or -r or -o flags, for example), you can reap the portability benefits of POSIX.
I hate to say, "please re-read my original comment," but I think it might actually apply in your case.
In regards to ripgrep
> that is clearly not a sufficient criteria to exclude something from `base`. You need something else
The burden is on you to demonstrate why it should be included absent of a standard, not me to show why it should be excluded. Base maintenance work is a scarce resource.
Your only argument so far has been that posix compliance doesn’t matter.
This interaction is actually souring me on the project.
> Now, you could say having both grep and ripgrep installed by default would be somewhat wasteful. As the author of ripgrep, I agree with that. ripgrep is fine being something you opt into so long as coreutils is already included by default.
...
> This interaction is actually souring me.
You and me both. Maybe you could try actually reading my comments. I feel like I'm talking to an AI that has been trained to be maximally annoying through gaslighting.
So unless you can demonstrate that you're a real person (like my profile does), you're now on my ignore list.
1. Put rg in base without grep. I don’t care if scripts that use grep are broken. 2. Rg does not need to be in base
> you're now on my ignore list.
Ditto. But what I’ll remember is that the rg guy struggles to understand and reconcile the needs of people who rely on critical software.
You did not mention a word about scripting.
> But that's not what you originally said.
It is. The reason ripgrep should not be in base is because it’s not posix compliant.