Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Find a better name for neverest configure #2

Open
soywod opened this issue Sep 3, 2024 · 3 comments
Open

Find a better name for neverest configure #2

soywod opened this issue Sep 3, 2024 · 3 comments
Labels
enhancement New feature or request

Comments

@soywod
Copy link
Member

soywod commented Sep 3, 2024

The configure command is misleading. It can be interpreted as "configuring an account in the config file". Actually it configures an already existing account at the application level (set up keyring, folders etc).

@soywod soywod added the enhancement New feature or request label Sep 3, 2024
@shymega
Copy link

shymega commented Sep 3, 2024

What about configure ---add to add new accounts through the wizard flow? I really liked the wizard.

@soywod
Copy link
Member Author

soywod commented Sep 3, 2024

Adding account to existing configuratio should be fairly easy. Editing is trickier and I prefer to leave it to a dedicated tool. The real concern is how to properly split config commands: one for configuring an account at config file level (the actual wizard) and one for configuring an account at app level (the actual configure command).

We could have sth like:

  • neverest config wizard to start the wizard. If the given -c|--config (or the default path) points to a valid config file, it will just append the new config
  • neverest config keyring to configure the keyring system for the given account
  • neverst config <item> is open for future stuff to configure
  • neverest doctor to check that config file is ok, that all is configured

@shymega
Copy link

shymega commented Sep 11, 2024

I agree on most of your points.

However, I wonder if something like neverest init for the first-time setup,
neverrest init keyring $ACCOUNT/neverest init keyring --all, and so on.

It feels more ergonomic with the above, and init could be shortened to i-
a la NPM.

What do you think?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects
Status: No status
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants