Introduce `run` to execute user commands

[boonwj]

Description

Users are currently able to configure command names that are used by 1build. In this situation, 1build's main action will take place instead of the user's command. An example of this is shown below.

[user@localhost 1build]$ 1build set init "echo hello"
[user@localhost 1build]$ 1build list
------------------------------------------------------------------------
project: gopi
before: export GO111MODULE=on
commands:
init | echo hello
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[user@localhost 1build]$ 1build init
'1build.yaml' configuration file already exists.

One way to deal with this will be for 1build to return an error when an invalid command name is found in the configuration. However, when additional commands are added by 1build in the future, it may conflict with a previously legal user configuration.

A specific 1build keyword such as run should be reserved to execute user-configured commands. This will allow future changes to 1build without affecting user configured commands.

Acceptance

• 1build run [cmd1] should execute the user configured command
• 1build run [cmd1] [cmd2] ... should execute the commands in sequence
• README.md should reflect the change in usage

[gopinath-langote]

Hello @boonwj

Thank you for suggesting feature. This feature make sense as going further we introduce more and more 1build ccommands - this will segreagate user vs 1build commands.

Let's take this to next milestone. Feel free to grab if you want to work on it.

[gopinath-langote]

@boonwj Did you get time to work on the issue?

[boonwj]

Sorry, I forgot to follow up on this. I will work on it over the next few days.

[gopinath-langote]

@boonwj Hi,

I am assuming that, we are removing running user defined command by 1build xyz

• the run command is optional and only useful when there is a conflict between 1build and user defined command.

The order of execution-

1. 1build command
2. user defined command
3. if conflict - use 1build run xyz

Let me know if you need more clarification

[gopinath-langote]

The motivation behind this is to use as minimal command as possible.

And the idea behind this tool was to avoid long commands.

[boonwj]

Oh I see what you mean. I misunderstood the intention of the feature.

In the above mentioned order of execution, the program's behavior may be inconsistent with what the user expects. For example, should 1build run be treated as an incomplete command and help message be displayed, or should the user-defined "run" be executed?

Would it perhaps be better for this functionality to be a flag --run instead of a keyword? Or perhaps, retain the existing logic, but just raise a warning when conflicting user defined commands are used?

wdyt?

[gopinath-langote]

Hi @boonwj ,

How about giving --run as flag when there is a conflict.

Order :

1. Execute 1build command (delete,set, unset etc)
2. If not 1build command - execute user-defined command from YAML file
3. If we find the conflict – execute 1build command with warning message with help to run user-defined command is a priority by 1buildl --run command

Example yaml

project: Sample Web App
commands:
  - build: npm run build
  - unset: echo 'removing something'

Command: 1build unset build

– Here the output will be something like this:

Found the conflict of command name `unset` – Executing 1build command over project configured command. To execute project-specific command run `1build --run unset`

And then execute 1build command.

When passed 1build --run unset – run the command from the configuration.

WDYT?

[boonwj]

I realised that this functionality in its current form would not be very useful.

Since any future conflicting command will still break a user's existing workflow (i.e. running 1build's command over user's defined). It is more likely that they change the conflicting keyword instead of adding a --run flag in their future runs.

Perhaps its better to raise a warning and continue executing user's commands first, or raise a conflicting keyword error and exit.

[gopinath-langote]

@boonwj I see. I got your point. Agree most likely user will change their command name instead of using flag.

Let's go ahead with a showing warning message and continue executing the user's command as of now.

With this we still have a chance to enhance this feature with --run flag in case users are more tends to do so.

WDYT?

[boonwj]

Yeah lets go ahead with that. I will work on it over the next few days.

[gopinath-langote]

@boonwj thanks for signup. Looking forward to your PR.