Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Consider making use of CLI library such as urfave/cli #11

Open
jurisevo opened this issue Dec 20, 2022 · 2 comments
Open

Consider making use of CLI library such as urfave/cli #11

jurisevo opened this issue Dec 20, 2022 · 2 comments

Comments

@jurisevo
Copy link
Collaborator

In current implementation there is custom abstractions in place to implement sub-commands. From one side it is reasonable since it does not require additional 3rd party dependencies, on the other hand it is a case of NIH perhaps.

At some point it may make sense to consider some lite-weight CLI "framework" like urfave/cli.

But in any case adoption should be carefully weighed.

@DaniruKun
Copy link

I'd also take a look at https://github.com/spf13/cobra , it has very solid docs and adoption (e.g. it's used by most Go-based CLI tools like kubectl), and has an optional command/subcommand generator, which greatly speeds up work.

@jurisevo
Copy link
Collaborator Author

jurisevo commented Feb 1, 2023

@DaniruKun Thank you for suggestions. Out of the context of this specific project I evaluated cobra. I agree to all points you highlight, the main reason for my subjective opinion against adopting it - it's relatively heavy-weight dependency. I prefer lightweight.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants