linux-cli-community
linux-cli-community copied to clipboard
Rafficer
Going back to the menu
added a "go back to menu entry" to all the entry where it made sense to add it. Now you can configure all the app without relaunching it.
I also cleaned up some things that I can easily revert back if needed.
- New Exit entry into main menu
- Type menu into the proton username to go back to menu
- New option to go back to the menu added to each list
- (optional but thought it would make sense) since Plus and Visionary have the same functionality, I grouped them together.
(optional but thought it would make sense) since Plus and Visionary have the same functionality, I grouped them together.
Please remove this. This is done intentionally to avoid confusion of users ("I'm on visionary, why doesn't it support this plan?"). Not everyone knows that they are the same. As you've seen, it sets the same value anyway, it's just to not cause confusion.
These changes mess up protonvpn init:
It's also not possible anymore to choose visionary as plan, it just throws you back to the menu. Same if you choose it during initialization:
I did not take into account the init option, good catch ! :sweat_smile: I've tested it now, and it should work.
I added an 'Init' boolean argument to the 3 functions run during initialisation to display or not, and enable / disable the menu option.
I should have thought of this before my pull request. I hope it's ok now ?
Instead of adding a new boolean, wouldn't it make more sense to utilize write=True, which already exists?
Instead of adding a new boolean, wouldn't it make more sense to utilize
write=True, which already exists?
Good question. I don't think so since the relation between write and init mode isn't direct. It could be a hack tough, but adding a boolean and gaining in readability is a good compromise I think. But it's your software, so if you want me to remove it no problem.
I'm actually thinking about whether it would be better to rename it to init, as that's actually what matters.
It just doesn't make sense to have 2 booleans that are always the same in the 2 different cases.
Let me submit a PR to your branch later. :)