(doc) choco install update packages.config params

[Stunkymonkey]

Description Of Changes

some parameters are not documented. taken from https://github.com/chocolatey/choco/blob/develop/src/chocolatey/infrastructure.app/configuration/PackagesConfigFilePackageSetting.cs

Motivation and Context

Users should not have to read code.

Testing

• [ ] I have previewed these changes using the Docker Container or another method before submitting this pull request.

Change Types Made

• [ ] Minor documentation fix (typos etc.).
• [x] Major documentation change (refactoring, reformatting or adding documentation to existing page).
• [ ] New documentation page added.
• [ ] The change I have made should have a video added, and I have raised an issue for this.
  • Issue #

Change Checklist

• [ ] Requires a change to menu structure (top or left-hand side)/
• [ ] Menu structure has been updated

Related Issue

N/A

[pauby]

Can you fix the PR so only the changes show? If you are making whitespace changes, please use a separate commit.

[Stunkymonkey]

@pauby sure. is this better? (this was automatically applied editor-config)

[Stunkymonkey]

ping @pauby

[github-actions[bot]]

Is this still relevant? If so, what is blocking it? Is there anything you can do to help move it forward? This pull request will be closed in 14 days if it continues to be inactive.

[pauby]

@Stunkymonkey this isnt any different. This shows you have removed 559 lines and added 595. See the Files changed tab.

@AdmiringWorm @gep13 could this be down to line endings? What is normally done in this situation to allow the actual changes to be seen?

[AdmiringWorm]

@AdmiringWorm @gep13 could this be down to line endings? What is normally done in this situation to allow the actual changes to be seen?

It is highly likely due to line endings, yes, and most likely caused by what is set as the core.autocrlf settings for git. (This setting should normally be set to false for our repositories, but can be set to input for this repository).

Normally in this situation, we ask that the one that opened the PR to revert the changes to the line endings (or we make the change in some cases), but it can depend on a couple of things.

1. If the line endings are changed to be fixed, then that should be a separate commit.
2. Or if the line endings are incorrect, update the setting I mentioned before, change the line endings again and commit the file in the same commit).

I am not sure what is the case for this PR.

[Stunkymonkey]

Hey @pauby and @AdmiringWorm

this is related to the line-endings. this is why I separated it into a separate commit (see 0ca6ec9d96bf37da53f31dc7b4fd0f38ec9be3bf), so it is easier for you to review.

I am confused. why is the .editorconfig located in this repo if it is enforce to not use it..?

[Stunkymonkey]

ping @pauby and @AdmiringWorm

[pauby]

@Stunkymonkey Thanks for the PR to update the documentation. We're going to hold off on merging it, as you bring up a good point - what options make sense to add to packages.config. Options such as --yes and the checksum ones, may be counter productive to add.

[Stunkymonkey]

@pauby thanks for your response.

The parameter you mentioned: --yes and --checksum* are not part of the packages.config. So everything is implemented correctly within chocolatey itself. I am not adding documentation for it, because the "xml-attributes" are extracted from the code as mentioned in the MR.

[AdmiringWorm]

@pauby thanks for your response.

The parameter you mentioned: --yes and --checksum* are not part of the packages.config. So everything is implemented correctly within chocolatey itself. I am not adding documentation for it, because the "xml-attributes" are extracted from the code as mentioned in the MR.

Those parameters was caused by a misunderstanding with what I told @pauby. They are actually the confirm and the downloadChecksum* attributes (there are others as well).

We aren't requesting any changes at the moment, as it needs to be an internal discussion on what attributes we want to have documented or not, and whether all the attributes that is currently sourced in Chocolatey CLI is appropriate.

[Stunkymonkey]

thanks for the feedback. If you have any updates/new requests. please let me know.

[pauby]

To set expectations on this @Stunkymonkey, there is a lot of work that needs to be done from our side before we would merge this in. This work is to define what would be usable in the packages.config file and not what can be added to it.

[Stunkymonkey]

@pauby is this really up for discussion? I mean it is already implemented at: https://github.com/chocolatey/choco/blob/develop/src/chocolatey/infrastructure.app/configuration/PackagesConfigFilePackageSetting.cs

I reduced the changes to a minimum, so it is easier for the review.

[pauby]

@Stunkymonkey I'm unsure what else to say that I haven't already. We won't be in a position to merge this in until we have decided what would be usable in the packages.config. I apologise that we won't be able to use it at the moment, but we do appreciate the PR.

[Stunkymonkey]

ping @pauby & @AdmiringWorm

[pauby]

@Stunkymonkey please don't ping people on PR's. See my previous comments about not being in a position to merge this.

[Stunkymonkey]

Sorry but the PR is almost a year old. I was just interested if some work is currently happening.