Allow user to specify which script a subcommand should call

[matthewadams]

If the script a user wants to execute as a subcommand doesn't abide by the naming convention that's documented (like pm install looks for script pm-install), the user should be able to specify the script that's to be executed. For example:

// file: ./examples/pm
var program = require('..');

program
  .version('0.0.1')
  .command('install [name]', 'install one or more packages', 'myinstall') // (1)
  .command('search [query]', 'search with optional query', '../others/q.js') // (2)
  .command('list', 'list packages installed', {isDefault: true}, '/home/me/foo/bar/mylist.js') // (3)
  .parse(process.argv);

In (1), commander would assume the same directory as the current file, look for ./myinstall, then if not found, append .js, resulting in ./myinstall.js.
In (2), commander would use the path relative to the current file. No .js appended since there's already a .js extension.
in (3), commander would use the absolute path. No .js appended since there's already a .js extension.

[b4dnewz]

2 years... will this issue never be addressed? 😞 it is an extremely useful feature that you can use an alternative naming convention or specify a file

[abetomo]

Thanks for your suggestion.
I will add features.

[shadowspawn]

Pull Request #854 adds an option for this.

I am interested in feedback on executableFile as the option name?

e.g.

program
.command("example", "example description", { executableFile: "myExampleCommand" });

[shadowspawn]

Pull Request #999 is being considered for v3, adds option to override executable file name

[shadowspawn]

This issue will be resolved when v3.0.0 is released. Available now as a prerelease. See #1001

[shadowspawn]

.command now supports the executableFile option (thanks to @abetomo).
Shipped in v3: https://github.com/tj/commander.js/releases/tag/v3.0.0