Copilot

> @copilot On second thought move the old command to be 'flub deprecated' instead of 'flub vnext'. Moved the old command implementation from `flub vnext generate changelog` to `flub deprecated...

> @copilot Leave the vnext command in place but mark it deprecated as well using the command's deprecated propery, and explain that the main command is now to be used....

> @copilot You need to do a full build in build-tools and commit the generated changes too. Built the build-tools workspace and regenerated the documentation: 1. Built workspace dependencies in...

> I think we can get rid of one of the implementations by making the vnext command just an alias of the main command, and marking the alias deprecated using...

> @copilot merge the latest main branch changes, and update the PR title and description to reflect the full set of changes. Be succinct. Merged latest main and updated PR...

> @copilot another change. Instead of moving the vnext command, leave it as is and move the existing command to legacy. Then add aliases to the vnext command to handle...

> See if there is an Oclif setting to output the he readme. We don't want to lose the docs on the main command that people use. The `oclif readme`...

> @copilot change of plans. Leave the vnext command as it is in main. Move the current command to the legacy folder. Then in the current command's place, create a...

> @copilot please make the extended command and then I can check out this branch locally and investigate the module resolution issues myself. Changed to the extending approach as requested....

> @copilot mark the script as experimental and untested in the markdown files. And instead of merging into main branch, I want a new branch called script Added experimental warnings...