Thought about submitting this to oh-my-fish to increase visibility?

[iggy]

I'm not sure if I'm the weird one here, but I almost always look for fish things in omf before resorting to google. I think this package being available via omf would be awesome.

[xordspar0]

Or you could submit it upstream to the fish project itself.

[dotCipher]

Why would it be better to submit to the main fish project itself? If anything, it should probably be implemented in kubectl itself, not the core fish shell.

However it seems like both the issues raised in the kubernetes repo: kubernetes/kubernetes#30763 as well as the kubectl repo: kubernetes/kubectl#131 were closed without any reasonable solution.

The workaround here would probably be just to include it in fish package managers instead (like omf).

[xordspar0]

I does make more sense for kubectl to support completion for fish. There is progress in that area. spf13/cobra#754 is an open PR to cobra, kubectl's CLI library, that would add this support. kubernetes/kubectl#131 was closed due to inactivity, but the change to cobra would allow it to move forward.

[dotCipher]

Ah ok, I missed that one. I stand corrected, thanks!

[jorgebucaran]

Hi @dotCipher, I don't know if this is unusual in other platforms, but in fish, the practice is to do as suggested and submit completions to the main repository. The ideal would be if kubectl sent completions to fish-shell/fish-shell themselves, but there's nothing strange about users doing it.

[dotCipher]

Yeah, I misunderstood, but that makes sense now. I guess we will have to wait on spf13/cobra#754 to finish before taking further action here.

[arbourd]

I guess we will have to wait on spf13/cobra#754 to finish before taking further action here.

Why? Re: submit completions to the main repository

[wwentland]

Why? Re: submit completions to the main repository

The underlying reason is that there is a preference for completions to be generated programmatically in a similar way to what is done for bash and zsh.