On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 12:53 PM, Ludovic Courtès <ludo@gnu.org> wrote:
> "Thompson, David" <dthompson2@worcester.edu> skribis:
>
>> On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 10:59 AM, Ludovic Courtès <ludo@gnu.org> wrote:
>>
>>> I guess we must still support -E for compatibility.  Probably it should
>>> do an implicit ‘sh -c’?
>>
>> This introduces implementation issues.  What if a user provides both a
>> -E command *and* a command after '--'?  What's the sane thing to do?
>
> I’d consider this a bug in the user’s mind ;-) and would do whatever is
> easiest.
>
>> I also don't feel strongly that we need to keep flags around for
>> compatibility this early in the game, given that we are alpha software
>> and such.
>
> I think it’s neither black nor white.
>
> For instance, I use it at work for continuous integration.  I can
> definitely migrate the scripts to the new syntax, but it’s best if it
> doesn’t break overnight.
>
> So we could remove -E from ‘--help’ and from the manual, but still keep
> it around for a while.

Here is the patch that does this.

Thanks,

- Dave