@W-22597613: Added cli support for Preferences API#476
Conversation
| limit: Flags.integer({ | ||
| char: 'l', | ||
| description: 'Maximum number of results (1-200)', | ||
| default: 200, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think we can set ranges in these flags: min/max. We should do that when we know the spec will enforce it
| exclusive: ['query', 'search-phrase', 'value-type'], | ||
| }), | ||
| 'sort-by': Flags.string({ | ||
| description: `Sort field (${SORTABLE_FIELDS.join(', ')})`, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think we can set the options of this flag if we know the exact fields it can be?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think most other clients have tests. Follow their patterns to get test coverage here.
|
|
||
| The CLI exposes two command groups: | ||
|
|
||
| - `b2c scapi preferences global` — read and update custom preferences at the **organization** (global) level. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We should not use the scapi topic here. The scapi topic is for metadata about SCAPI itself, which is not the case for preferences. Preferences should live at the top level
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@clavery So should I move the entire preferences out of scapi topic itself?
| description: 'Preference group ID', | ||
| required: true, | ||
| }), | ||
| 'instance-type': Args.string({ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
this should be a flag and it should default to development or current if that's available. We should also try to not to repeat flags, especially since we have a PreferencesCommand base class
2 participants
Summary
Brief description of what this PR does.
Testing
How was this tested?
Dependencies
3pl-approvedis set by a maintainerpnpm test)pnpm run format)