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

[airshipctl] airshipctl Syntax Issue #519

Open
pgoyal01 opened this issue Apr 8, 2021 · 9 comments
Open

[airshipctl] airshipctl Syntax Issue #519

pgoyal01 opened this issue Apr 8, 2021 · 9 comments
Assignees
Labels
7-NiceToHave Relates to issues of lower priority that are not part of critical functionality or have work arounds enhancement New feature or request priority/low Items that are considered non-critical for functionality, such as quality of life improvements size l
Milestone

Comments

@pgoyal01
Copy link

pgoyal01 commented Apr 8, 2021

The typical airshipctl command syntax is of the form

airshipctl [TYPE] [command] [sub-command] [flags]

where TYPE = {baremetal, cluster, config, plan, ...}, and the commands, sub-commands and flags, except for help, are specific to the TYPE.

However, airshipctl completion SHELL doesn't follow the syntax. This is not a documentation issue as it requires a change in the code.

@pgoyal01 pgoyal01 changed the title [airshipctl] airshipctly Syntax Issue [airshipctl] airshipctl Syntax Issue Apr 8, 2021
@lb4368 lb4368 added the triage Needs evaluation by project members label Apr 13, 2021
@kathirigayathri48
Copy link

I want to work on it. Please assign this to me.

@eak13
Copy link

eak13 commented Apr 15, 2021

@kathirigayathri48 all yours

@eak13 eak13 added enhancement New feature or request and removed triage Needs evaluation by project members labels Apr 20, 2021
@eak13 eak13 added this to the v2.1 milestone Apr 20, 2021
@jezogwza jezogwza added 7-NiceToHave Relates to issues of lower priority that are not part of critical functionality or have work arounds priority/low Items that are considered non-critical for functionality, such as quality of life improvements labels Apr 21, 2021
@michaelfix
Copy link

@kathirigayathri48 , what t-shirt size would you estimate the work effort to be to finish?

  • <=1 days | Small | refactor, 1 function, documentation
  • 2-5 days | Medium | moderate complexity, generic code, or enhancement to existing feature
  • 5-7+ days | Large | multiple functional areas; complex function or capability, or multiple PSs

@kathirigayathri48
Copy link

Please tag "Large"

@lb4368 lb4368 added the size l label Apr 28, 2021
@jezogwza jezogwza modified the milestones: v2.1, Future Jul 7, 2021
@kathirigayathri48 kathirigayathri48 removed their assignment Aug 7, 2021
@PratikDhanave
Copy link

@eak13 @kathirigayathri48 Please assign to me. I like to work on it.

@PratikDhanave
Copy link

investigating https://github.com/spf13/cobra for airshipctl [TYPE] [command] [sub-command] [flags]

@PratikDhanave
Copy link

patch set created

@aaronsheffield
Copy link

@ian-howell
Copy link
Contributor

ian-howell commented Oct 4, 2021

I'm not sure this issue is valid.

The typical airshipctl command syntax is of the form

airshipctl [TYPE] [command] [sub-command] [flags]

where TYPE = {baremetal, cluster, config, plan, ...}, and the commands, sub-commands and flags, except for help, are specific to the TYPE.

Why are we supposing that completion isn't a TYPE of command?

Perhaps more directly, how do we expect the completion command to be used on the CLI?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
7-NiceToHave Relates to issues of lower priority that are not part of critical functionality or have work arounds enhancement New feature or request priority/low Items that are considered non-critical for functionality, such as quality of life improvements size l
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

9 participants