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

Remove differences between serve and cozy-app-dev.sh #2872

Open
ptbrowne opened this issue Jan 26, 2021 · 3 comments
Open

Remove differences between serve and cozy-app-dev.sh #2872

ptbrowne opened this issue Jan 26, 2021 · 3 comments

Comments

@ptbrowne
Copy link
Contributor

ptbrowne commented Jan 26, 2021

It seems like cozy-stack serve and cozy-app-dev.sh could be merged ? It would make onboarding a little easier. Internally, some people use cozy-app-dev and some use cozy-stack serve. Listing differences :

  • Support for multi app
  • Creation of the Cozy if destroyed
  • cozy-app-dev can install/update the binary for the stack
  • cozy-app-dev starts cozy-stack serve with the --mailhog flag
  • cozy-app-dev starts cozy-stack serve with the --allow-root flag (I think it was added for windows developers)

EDIT: Added the differences listed below by nono

@nono
Copy link
Member

nono commented Jan 26, 2021

There are other differences:

  • cozy-app-dev can install/update the binary for the stack
  • cozy-app-dev starts cozy-stack serve with the --mailhog flag
  • cozy-app-dev starts cozy-stack serve with the --allow-root flag (I think it was added for windows developers)

The support for multi-app is the only thing that could be moved to cozy-stack serve. For the other differences, I think we should still use cozy-app-dev (and improve it if needed).

@ptbrowne
Copy link
Contributor Author

ptbrowne commented Jan 26, 2021

I think the main idea behind using cozy-stack serve was to reduce the number of executables to know. Here, I think it is justified that

  1. cozy-stack serve should not take care of creating an instance
  2. Running with --allow-root or --mailhog by default

On the other hand, it seems it would be more ergonomic to only have to use the cozy-stack binary. Do you think adding a cozy-stack dev command would be a good compromise ? Not polluting serve with dev only concerns, while simplifying usage by using a single entrypoint.

@JF-Cozy
Copy link
Contributor

JF-Cozy commented Jan 27, 2021

Je pense qu'on pourrait commencer par lister les différents cas à prendre en compte par ce cozy-stack dev et de lister les problèmes rencontrés en utilisant cozy-stack serve afin de voir s'il y a une réelle pertinence.

D'un point de vue extérieur il n'y a eu qu'un cas problématique en 6 mois (le fait de s'assurer qu'il y a bien une instance de créée avant de lancer un serve) et de mon expérience perso l'utilisation de cozy-stack serve et ultra limitée et se résume à toujours lancer la même commande.

J'ai eu quelques déboire avec cozy-stack quand j'ai eu besoin de faire du multi-instance, mais j'ai été content de comprendre le fonctionnement et de pouvoir me débrouiller avec des commandes "bas niveau".

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

3 participants