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

switch verb and context in commands #27

Closed
timvink opened this issue Mar 15, 2021 · 1 comment
Closed

switch verb and context in commands #27

timvink opened this issue Mar 15, 2021 · 1 comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request

Comments

@timvink
Copy link
Collaborator

timvink commented Mar 15, 2021

Now we have the verb first:

doing create issue
doing create pr
doing close pr
doing close issue
doing list
doing init
doing open issue
doing open pr

Probably a subset of doing users also use / are used to the github cli, which has the other order, f.e.:

gh issue create
gh issue close
gh issue list
gh pr ...

It's a more natural grouping of the commands, and I've notice in using doing that I actually already typed doing issue create once, probably because I first think of the thing I want to manipulate (issue) before what I want to do with it (create). It mainly applies to creating and closing, not so much the others.

Concretely, do:

  • Implement doing issue create, doing issue close, doing pr create and doing pr close
  • doing create issue, doing close issue, doing create pr and doing close pr
@timvink timvink added the enhancement New feature or request label Mar 15, 2021
@operte
Copy link
Collaborator

operte commented Mar 16, 2021

I find that the <verb> <item> makes more sense, but it feels mostly a matter of convention. To make adopting doing as easy as possible, we can change it to the <item> <verb> syntax, sure :)

The only advantage of the <verb> <item> <item_no> syntax that I see is that maybe in the future we could find a way to skip the <item> and just have <verb> <item_no> automatically figure out what type of <item> <item_no> relates to. That might be a bit more awkward to achieve on the <item> <verb> <item_no> syntax.

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
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants