(GH-1059) Fix for setting global variables

[alex3305]

commandExecutionTimeoutSeconds was defined twice in the Chocolatey
configuration. With this pull request, only the primary key is used. This
fixes the incorrect behaviour that choco exhibited when changing this
value through choco config.

Closes #1059 #973.

For testing use the following commands:

PS> choco config set commandExecutionTimeoutSeconds 7200
PS> choco config get commandExecutionTimeoutSeconds

In the old version, the default value of 2700 was displayed. In this change
the value will be set at the given value.

[ferventcoder]

Thanks! I will review this and look to get it fixed for 0.10.4.

[ferventcoder]

In the interim, can you review the CONTRIBUTING document for how the git commit should be done and make those fixes? Much appreciated.

[alex3305]

Reworked my issue according to CONTRIBUTING.md. Thanks for the feedback.

[ferventcoder]

The actual git commit itself will need amended - note contributing does mention how to do this. Also, we can be sticklers on that summary - "(GH-###) summary" is how we want to see it. So parentheses, then a space, then the summary. And try to keep that to about 50ish characters.

[ferventcoder]

Going to review this a bit more but it looks pretty good to me!

[alex3305]

Fixed it for you :). At least I hope I got it right now. Thanks for the feedback :)

[alex3305]

I've created a workaround for setting the variable through Powershell's XML interface:

$path = "C:\ProgramData\chocolatey\config\chocolatey.config"
$xml = [xml](Get-Content $path)
$xml.chocolatey.commandExecutionTimeoutSeconds = "2700"
$xml.SelectSingleNode('//chocolatey/config/add[@key="commandExecutionTimeoutSeconds"]').value = "2700"
$xml.SelectSingleNode('//chocolatey/config/add[@key="webRequestTimeoutSeconds"]').value = "30"
$xml.Save($path)

This is an easy way to modify the config file within a scripting environment.

[ferventcoder]

@alex3305 this looks to have went to the deprecated commandExecutionTimeoutSettings - We haven't used those in a long time, the idea was to upgrade those to the new locations.

I think it's probably okay to remove those now though.

[ferventcoder]

@alex3305 moved forward on this in a different way. I really appreciate your contributions, hopefully next time we can get a deeper review a little sooner.