Add -f flag as option on rm.

[KingsleyKelly]

This fixes #752

Just added another flag to rm and a test. I'm not sure if this is addressed by any other pull requests, but I couldn't find them.

[albers]

Please give me a ping if this is accepted so that I can add the flag to bash completion.

[aanand]

Is this necessary? I believe docopt normalises -f to --force.

[KingsleyKelly]

You are entirely right. I seem to have fixed a bug that was fixed! Sorry, I also tested this against my current version of fig where the flag failed and thought the above had fixed it. I can close this pull request if that makes the most sense.

[aanand]

No need. You can make a change while keeping it to one commit with git commit --amend, and then push that to your branch with git push --force.

[aanand]

To be clear: it's your change to the docs for rm that causes -f to work as a short version of --force. That's how docopt works - you write the docs and it implements the flags.

But we don't need the check for options.get('-f') because docopt is smart and just sets options['--force'] if it sees -f. So this line can be reverted.

[KingsleyKelly]

Ok that's awesome. Have amended the commit.

[aanand]

LGTM

[dnephin]

LGTM, but it seems like the wercker build hasn't run against this PR for some reason?

[KingsleyKelly]

I tried amending the commit and opening a new pull request, neither of which triggered wercker. I'm unfamiliar with the service, is this likely to be an error on my end?

[dnephin]

Nope, I don't think it's on your end. I know @aanand is working on having the test suite run on jenkins, I'm not sure if wercker integration was disabled, or if there is an error on their end.

[aanand]

Looks like Wercker is still running but we've lost the indicator, possibly because I added hooks for Jenkins and it's confusing GitHub about what to show.

The build was successful, so I'm going to merge.