Launchable Create Cli by tylerfong · Pull Request #357 · brevdev/brev-cli

tylerfong · 2026-04-17T20:32:40Z

No description provided.

patelspratik · 2026-04-17T20:40:46Z

+	var script string
+	switch {
+	case opts.LifecycleFilePath != "":
+		content, err := os.ReadFile(opts.LifecycleFilePath)


can we check filesize before we read it into memory?

patelspratik · 2026-04-17T20:41:30Z

+	return assignments, nil
+}
+
+func validateTunnelName(name string) string {


could these just be errors?

This is just message function for an error call

patelspratik · 2026-04-17T20:43:40Z

+	if start < 1 || start > 65535 || end < 1 || end > 65535 {
+		return 0, 0, breverrors.NewValidationError(fmt.Sprintf("port range %q must stay within 1-65535", raw))
+	}
+	if start >= end {


can't they be equal if you want to use a single port?

That's if it uses the notation "-",implying range, otherwise just specify "22" directly,

patelspratik · 2026-04-17T20:47:21Z

+)
+
+const (
+	defaultLaunchableViewAccess = "public"


defaulting to public feels scary in case people are testing and using keys in them. How do you feel about defaulting to organization?

patelspratik · 2026-04-17T20:49:41Z

+	return u.String()
+}
+
+func parseSizeToGiB(raw string) (int, error) {


there is existing logic you can follow. @drewmalin did some refactor work to try and fix this area because it was wrong in a bunch of places:

Claude recommendation from analyzing cloud SDK and dev-plane:

Recommended fix (smallest path): drop the base-10 aliases and just handle kib/mib/gib/tib (and optionally b), matching what units.Base2Bytes emits. The case-insensitive match is fine to keep for defensiveness.

Better path (longer-term alignment): have the CLI consume the new MinSizeBytes / MaxSizeBytes JSON (cloudv1.Bytes with {value, unit} shape), and use cloudv1.ByteCountInUnitInt64(cloudv1.Gibibyte) directly. Removes string parsing entirely and stays correct across unit changes.

patelspratik · 2026-04-17T20:50:35Z

can you generate some tests?

patelspratik · 2026-04-17T21:58:25Z

+	YamlString string `json:"yamlString,omitempty"`
+}
+
+type ValidateDockerComposeResponse map[string]interface{}


doesn't seem like we need the response? Could ValidateDockerCompose just return error, and we just use the res inside the function to se if it isError() ?

patelspratik · 2026-04-17T23:29:34Z

+	for i := range allInstanceTypes.AllInstanceTypes {
+		if allInstanceTypes.AllInstanceTypes[i].Type == instanceType {
+			if len(allInstanceTypes.AllInstanceTypes[i].WorkspaceGroups) == 0 {
+				return nil, breverrors.NewValidationError(fmt.Sprintf("instance type %q does not have a workspace group for this organization", instanceType))


can we change this error message to:

instance type %q not valid for this organization since workspace groups aren't a thing users can do anything with

patelspratik · 2026-04-17T23:36:20Z

+
+Use Compose mode when you want:
+
+- a multi-service environment


should this also include jupyter since we set that to true by default for compose?

patelspratik · 2026-04-17T23:37:16Z

+
+Allowed values:
+
+- `public`


is it worth explaining these visibilities ? e.g. what's the difference between public and published? Are you thinking that's more of a concern for the skill?

patelspratik · 2026-04-17T23:58:42Z

+	if len(name) > 63 {
+		return "Name must be 63 characters or fewer"
+	}
+	if !regexp.MustCompile(`^[a-z0-9]`).MatchString(name) {


can we pull these three regexes up as vars that way we don't have to compile them every time? like githubDirectoryURLPattern

brycelelbach · 2026-04-18T11:33:25Z

Hey @tylerfong — I was working on a parallel CLI path (#364) before I noticed this PR. Yours is further along and more comprehensive, so I'm going to close #364 and defer to this one.

Two follow-up asks I'd love to see (happy to do them as separate PRs after this lands):

--from-file <spec.json> as an alternative input mode. The flag-based UX is great for humans, but there's real value in a spec-file path for:
- CI/automation (programmatically generated launchables, e.g. our NVIDIA accelerated-computing content pipeline),
- Round-tripping a launchable captured from the Console's DevTools POST /v2/launchables body,
- Source-controlling launchable definitions alongside the code they deploy.
The cleanest wire-up would be --from-file as a mutually-exclusive alternative to the individual flags — everything gets parsed into the same CreateEnvironmentLaunchableRequest, and the downstream validation (instance-type availability, compose YAML validation, port-conflict checks) still runs.
Publish a JSON schema for the launchable config. Once --from-file exists, launchables become a first-class artifact type and we should treat them like one: ship a launchable.schema.json (either under docs/ in this repo, or — better — served from the control plane at a stable URL) so that:
- Editors can do completion/validation against $schema links in spec files,
- The CLI can validate locally before the round-trip to the server,
- Launchables can expose their own configs — a launchable that embeds the schema it conforms to is self-describing, which matters for marketplace/discovery UX.

Related bonus ask for the Console team (not this PR, just flagging): once the schema exists, the Console's launchable-creation wizard should accept a JSON upload as an alternative to clicking through the form. Same schema, two entry points (wizard + upload), one source of truth. That closes the loop for users who author their launchable in a text editor and don't want to re-enter everything in a UI.

Happy to drive either (1) or (2) after #357 merges. None of this is a blocker on the existing review.

drewmalin · 2026-04-21T16:34:30Z

Steph actually has been messing with the instance type service proto, and in particular the "get instance types available" route is... available!

We should be able to do:

	req := connect.NewRequest(&devplaneapiv1.ListInstanceTypeRequest{
		Options: &devplaneapiv1.ListInstanceTypeOptions{
			OrganizationId: orgID,
		},
	})

	resp, err := client.ListInstanceType(ctx, req)

and have the full types here. Then we don't need to redefine structs like GPU, Price, Storage, etc. etc.

tylerfong and others added 3 commits April 16, 2026 16:38

boiler for launchable create flow

f522138

fixed build error unit tests

3aca6d3

added doc.md

bee0621

tylerfong requested a review from a team as a code owner April 17, 2026 20:32

tylerfong changed the title ~~Launchable create cli~~ Launchable Create Cli Apr 17, 2026

patelspratik reviewed Apr 17, 2026

View reviewed changes

tylerfong added 2 commits April 17, 2026 13:51

fixed pr comments

d4fdd87

fixed linting

11b1221

patelspratik reviewed Apr 17, 2026

View reviewed changes

brycelelbach mentioned this pull request Apr 18, 2026

feat(launchable): add brev launchable create command #364

Closed

7 tasks


		Use Compose mode when you want:

		- a multi-service environment

Conversation

tylerfong commented Apr 17, 2026

Uh oh!

patelspratik Apr 17, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

patelspratik Apr 17, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

tylerfong Apr 17, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

patelspratik commented Apr 17, 2026

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

patelspratik Apr 17, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

brycelelbach commented Apr 18, 2026

Uh oh!

drewmalin commented Apr 21, 2026

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

4 participants

patelspratik Apr 17, 2026 •

edited

Loading

patelspratik Apr 17, 2026 •

edited

Loading

tylerfong Apr 17, 2026 •

edited

Loading

patelspratik Apr 17, 2026 •

edited

Loading