fix(core): Point users to the official documentation when they use n8n --help

[despairblue]

Summary

The help users got with n8n --help was misleading. Some commands had no documentation. If a command had multiple subcommands, only the documentation for the first one would be shown in the main page, e.g. import would only mention that you can import credentials, but not that you can import workflows.

An idea here is that we can point the user directly to docs.n8n.io instead.

Downside may be that the docs will always document the latest version, but the user may run an older version of n8n. We're willing to accept that though. And the help for commands and topics would still be available.

This PR has no tests. I don't think it needs one, because the damage that is caused by the custom help message disappearing and the old one appearing again is limited.
If you disagree let me know and I write one, but right now it seams there are no tests that execute bin/n8n and check what it prints. So that would a completely new kind of test.

cli.help.mp4

Related tickets and issues

https://linear.app/n8n/issue/PAY-195/ensure-n8n-help-gives-useful-and-accurate-info

Review / Merge checklist

• PR title and summary are descriptive. Remember, the title automatically goes into the changelog. Use (no-changelog) otherwise. (conventions)
• Docs updated or follow-up ticket created.
• Tests included.

  A bug is not considered fixed, unless a test is added to prevent it from happening again.
  A feature is not complete without tests.

[krynble]

One thing I did not like is that now we don't have the help for specific commands anymore such as below.

I thought the top level n8n --help could benefit from taking people to the docs, but then special commands could still show their own help. WDYT?

[despairblue]

One thing I did not like is that now we don't have the help for specific commands anymore such as below.

I thought the top level n8n --help could benefit from taking people to the docs, but then special commands could still show their own help. WDYT?

From what I saw in the oclif docs that should be possible. Let me try.

[despairblue]

@krynble it behaves the way you suggested.

This got me thinking now though.

We're hiding the CLI root help page because

1. it was showing one command that should be hidden BaseCommand,
2. some commands and topics were missing descriptions,
3. some were showing the description of their first subcommand instead of a summary (import)

The idea is to send users from n8n --help to the online docs and from there they could potentially come back and try n8n db --help for example. That's not an ideal UX for people that explore the n8n CLI.

The benefit I saw from not maintaining the CLI help in the code was that we only have to maintain the CLI documentation in one place, that is https://docs.n8n.io/hosting/cli-commands/.

That benefit would have made up for the UX impairments. But now it seems we have both drawbacks

1. impaired UX
2. need to maintain the CLI docs in the code and online
   compared to just fixing the CLI root help page by hiding a command, documenting the others and finding out how topics can have documentation that is different from their subcommands.

Maybe we should merge this and create a ticket to bring the root help page back and fix it properly. WDYT?

[cypress]

1 flaky test on run #3917 ↗︎

0

338

5

0

1

Details:

🌳 🖥️ browsers:node18.12.0-chrome107 🤖 despairblue 🗃️ e2e/*
Project: n8n	Commit: 277170e893
Status: Passed	Duration: 20:11 💡
Started: Jan 26, 2024 7:18 AM	Ended: Jan 26, 2024 7:38 AM

  cypress/e2e/5-ndv.cy.ts • 1 flaky test

View Output Video

Test		Artifacts
NDV > should not retrieve remote options when required params throw errors		Test Replay Screenshots Video

Review all test suite changes for PR #8440 ↗︎

[github-actions]

⚠️ Some Cypress E2E specs are failing, please fix them before merging

[github-actions]

✅ All Cypress E2E specs passed

[krynble]

@despairblue I agree, maybe the action item we can derive from this is revisit the docs page and see if it's up to date.

One thing I noticed is that the db:revert is missing from the docs, so we might also be missing others in there.

Could you then create another ticket to check whether our docs page is up to date?

[despairblue]

Could you then create another ticket to check whether our docs page is up to date?

Will do. Should I assign it to payday or docs?

[krynble]

That should be Payday @despairblue - You can merge this PR then.

[janober]

Got released with [email protected]