Breaking: rename every yarn <command> rm to yarn <command> remove

[tpina]

Summary

From #3952 - For the sake of consistency and clarity, we need to rename the rm command to remove and add a deprecation warning for rm.

Test plan
I have done some rounds of functional manual testing.

Unfortunately, every command with rm requires a login. Coincidentally, and if I am not mistaken, none of the commands that implement rm has tests ( owner, tag, team).

I will happily add tests for those but I can't seem to make a mock login to work... I need suggestions/guidance?

Note: I'm working on a windows machine. When I try to run yarn run test I get the following

$ yarn lint && yarn test-only
Found 0 errors
C:\code\projects\yarn\node_modules\.bin\jest:2
basedir=$(dirname "$(echo "$0" | sed -e 's,\\,/,g')")
          ^^^^^^^
SyntaxError: missing ) after argument list
    at Object.exports.runInThisContext (vm.js:76:16)
    at Module._compile (module.js:542:28)
    at Object.Module._extensions..js (module.js:579:10)
    at Module.load (module.js:487:32)
    at tryModuleLoad (module.js:446:12)
    at Function.Module._load (module.js:438:3)
    at Module.runMain (module.js:604:10)
    at run (bootstrap_node.js:394:7)
    at startup (bootstrap_node.js:149:9)
    at bootstrap_node.js:509:3
error Command failed with exit code 1.
error Command failed with exit code 1.
info Visit https://yarnpkg.com/en/docs/cli/run for documentation about this command.

[tpina]

@BYK and @voxsim

Waiting for feedback

[BYK]

Note: I'm working on a windows machine. When I try to run yarn run test I get the following

Looks like your jest installation is a bit weird. Try removing that node_modules/.bin/jest file and replace it with the jest.cmd which should already be there. If not we'll figure it out.

[BYK]

LGTM except for the export parts.

@voxsim, I'll let you do the honors :)

[BYK]

Why not just export remove directly?

[tpina]

I wanted to keep consistency with the ls changes.

I have noticed that I forgot to change

['add <user> [[<@scope>/]<pkg>]', 'rm <user> [[<@scope>/]<pkg>]', 'ls [<@scope>/]<pkg>']

Should I do it? Also, ls is still there, should I change it as part of another issue/PR?

[BYK]

I'd defer any ls changes to their own PR. Also, okay for now for consistency but I think we can do better.

May be you'd be interested in cleaning that up in a follow-up PR?

[BYK]

Thanks a lot!

[tpina]

@BYK and @voxsim did a small update so that command templates are in line with the new specification. How can I update the website as well?

[BYK]

@tpina - The website is maintained in a different repository: https://github.com/yarnpkg/website/

[BYK]

Still LGTM, now including the export parts since I understand it was done for consistency.

@voxsim I'll merge this EOD today if you don't chime in and we can address any objections in follow-ups.

[BYK]

I'd defer any ls changes to their own PR. Also, okay for now for consistency but I think we can do better.

May be you'd be interested in cleaning that up in a follow-up PR?

[voxsim]

@BYK I don't have any objections, sorry but I am busy these days, @tpina thanks for the pr!

[tpina]

I'd defer any ls changes to their own PR. Also, okay for now for consistency but I think we can do better.
May be you'd be interested in cleaning that up in a follow-up PR?

@BYK Yes, not a problem. What do you mean that "we can do better" - Should I just export remove? Let me know what you want done. I have some time this week to do it.

[BYK]

@BYK I don't have any objections, sorry but I am busy these days, @tpina thanks for the pr!

No worries! Just making sure you're still in the loop :)