Show args used

[jycouet]

After npx sv add you get 👇

Would be cool to have a flag --show-args so that I will be able to use it next time?

# here something like
npx sv add drizzle=database:SQLite+client:libSQL --no-install

name is debatable :)

[Conduitry]

Having the CLI output how to run it next time to get it to do unattended whatever it is you selected in the menus this time sounds like a useful feature generally. I don't think we need to hide that behind a flag.

[jycouet]

I was thinking flag because it could be long and ugly, but I can start without a flag first and see.

[jycouet]

I think that #689 would be better to do first.

Today, I played around and managed:

Maybe in this format it would be better?

npx sv create jyc \
  --template minimal \
  --types ts \
  --no-install \
  --no-add-ons && \
npx sv add -C jyc \
  prettier \
  vitest=usages:unit,component \
  eslint \
  drizzle=database:sqlite+sqlite:libsql \
  --no-git-check \
  --install pnpm

All in all, it's taking a lot of space. Let's see!

[benmccann]

yeah, the flag might be nice to keep the UI clean. I wonder if it should actually create the project in that case or not

[jycouet]

yeah, the flag might be nice to keep the UI clean. I wonder if it should actually create the project in that case or not

Could be a flag --dry-run that would output the full cmd & not create anything. (I think I like that 👍)

[Conduitry]

I was thinking about --dry-run earlier, but then I found myself wondering whether I would expect that to check anything or do anything besides just print out the command line options. I think dry runs typically tell you more precisely what of is that would happen, and maybe run some checks to see whether everything looks okay. I'm not sure what that would mean in this case.

That said, I don't know that the noise of printing out the options on every run would be that bad. People aren't going to be running this terribly often, I don't think. I don't know what the noise would be getting in the way of.

[manuel3108]

Maybe in this format it would be better?

Windows is hating you for this one, as it executes each line individually. Even selecting to but it in one line breaks everything

Personally I would never use it, but I do see where you are coming from. I was just thinking about adding it to the readme or something, but I'm not sure this is a good idea.

[jycouet]

Readme could be nice yes!

• it's not changing the cool look and feel
• you can find it if you need it :)
• It's not for everyone ^^

[manuel3108]

The only thing im not sure is how we would handle multiple executions of sv add <different stuff each time>. Should we just add all executions and leave it up to the user to only keep the correct ones?

[jycouet]

The more I think about it, the more I think that readme is maybe not the best!

I think that anyway #689 should be done first.

Then we can maybe add this after all prompting so that it's not "in your face", like: