I haven't had much luck with getting things like this in the trunk, but if you'd like to see how I did it, I can strip it out and post a patch.
Actually, that's not strictly true. At the risk of starting an off-topic flame war, you've made this statement a few times so I thought I would make one (and one only) attempt to answer it.
First of all, this thread :
http://chdk.setepontos.com/index.php?topic=10584.0 came directly from your code, as mentioned in the first post. The key point here was a fairly complex
single functional addition (involving a fair amount of actual code) was discussed at length until agreement was made on the best way to do it. Your original patch file with several other functional change all rolled together did not meet this requirement - I had to isolate the functions of interest so they could be discussed.
Here's another example of a single functional change that was discussed and accepted :
http://chdk.setepontos.com/index.php?topic=10580.0 . You also participated in that discussion.
An option to turn off the <ALT> and script name has been mentioned in passing several times, including here :
http://chdk.setepontos.com/index.php?topic=10695.msg105321#msg105321 but a single patch file and a discussion thread on its implementation still need to be started. Patch files that are not bug fixes or new ports almost never make it into the code by being picked out of random threads.
So, my suggestion is that you present each of your proposed changes in separate thread dedicated to that change. As I've suggested to you in the past, please keep all related posts only in that thread. Spreading discussion about the patch across several threads is unlikely to help it get adopted. And it's also not helpful to the discussion if you keep repeating "let's do it my way" postings without any new thoughts or data to support the repeat post.
I'm done here.