1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
|
%global _empty_manifest_terminate_build 0
Name: python-p
Version: 1.4.0
Release: 1
Summary: Aliases any available project commands or scripts to `p <name>`.
License: MIT
URL: https://www.dropseed.dev/p
Source0: https://mirrors.aliyun.com/pypi/web/packages/88/27/9d05057da694ff15d3d921eff3c0c46075b98881c4f86f33d86782a8d137/p-1.4.0.tar.gz
BuildArch: noarch
Requires: python3-click
Requires: python3-click-didyoumean
%description
## Why
### Context switching sucks
It can often take several minutes just to figure out how to *start* working on
something.
Every project is different, but damn near every project comes with a set of
development commands or scripts to run common actions. And if it doesn’t, then
it probably should.
Different languages, people, and tools accomplish this in different ways. Some
projects use the good ol’ `Makefile`, while others use `package.json` “scripts”,
bash scripts, `rake`, `fabric`, and so on and so on…
P was built to make it easier to jump between projects,
and to save some keystrokes in the meantime.
### Improving developer experience
Ideally, p will “just work”.
But if not,
it is often in your project’s best interest to design a developer experience that *would* work if someone were using p.
That is – script out some of the most commonly used actions for your project (`install`, `test`, `deploy`, etc.),
and put them in a uniform place where contributors can easily figure out how to use them.
Now even the people who don't use p at least have a shot at getting up and running on their own.
### The search for a universal experience
For a long time I've been in search of the perfect development task manager to use on every project.
But that proved to be difficult as the repos got smaller,
more self-contained,
and spread across languages and dependency systems.
Using a Makefile is the closest thing to what I'm looking for.
Most people have `make`.
But there's a lot of things I just can't stand about it
(it's just ugly, and I can't help but think that it feels like some kind of *hack*).
I've settled on the idea of using a "scripts" folder with one-off files for each task.
Usually just bash scripts,
but can easily be a small Python script or something else.
These work basically everywhere,
and it's not hard to tell someone to do `./scripts/test`.
But even the "scripts" pattern doesn't make sense *on every project*.
Some frameworks/projects already come with a solution,
like pre-existing `package.json` "scripts".
Do we really want to create make `scripts/test` that just runs `npm run test`?
Seems dumb.
"I guess we'll use npm scripts on this project..."
So, every project inevitably ends up being a little bit different.
But for those of us that have to constantly jump around between those projects,
p smooths out the rough edges in our day-to-day,
and enables us to make per-project decisions about the developer experience
(and reminds us to even be thinking about that in the first place).
### Bonus: git hooks
Git hooks can be a super useful,
but confusing process to use.
The [gist](https://www.atlassian.com/git/tutorials/git-hooks#local-hooks) is that they generally aren't shared or set up for each user of a project automatically.
There are some tools like [pre-commit](https://pre-commit.com/) or [husky](https://github.com/typicode/husky) that really go the extra mile in creating a system for git hooks,
but a lot of our projects don't really warrant that and,
again,
it felt strange to now have a project dependency in that process...
Do we install that thing per-project even if the project doesn't use that language otherwise?
If we install it on our machines outside the project,
is that now a requirement that can't be required?
Is it even possible to run the hook/linter/formatter without that tool?
Anyway, p embraces git's (implied) attitude about hooks: they're optional.
If a user has p,
then we'll take an extra step to install the git hook for them and put things in place.
It's a nice-to-have.
If you don't have p, then at least you can still run your linters/formatters manually if you want (i.e. `npm run pre-commit`).
And if you need to *require* that those checks are run,
no matter who (or what) commits to the project?
Then set them up in CI.
You don't need anything special to do this --
just run your script/command as a step like a non-p user would.
It's not fancy,
and it works for us.
## Inspired by
- [Dropseed’s](https://github.com/dropseed) project-cli (private)
- [Flint Hills Design’s](https://github.com/flinthillsdesign) fhd-cli (private)
- [https://github.com/github/scripts-to-rule-them-all](https://github.com/github/scripts-to-rule-them-all)
- [https://github.com/bkeepers/strappydoo](https://github.com/bkeepers/strappydoo)
- having too many projects
%package -n python3-p
Summary: Aliases any available project commands or scripts to `p <name>`.
Provides: python-p
BuildRequires: python3-devel
BuildRequires: python3-setuptools
BuildRequires: python3-pip
%description -n python3-p
## Why
### Context switching sucks
It can often take several minutes just to figure out how to *start* working on
something.
Every project is different, but damn near every project comes with a set of
development commands or scripts to run common actions. And if it doesn’t, then
it probably should.
Different languages, people, and tools accomplish this in different ways. Some
projects use the good ol’ `Makefile`, while others use `package.json` “scripts”,
bash scripts, `rake`, `fabric`, and so on and so on…
P was built to make it easier to jump between projects,
and to save some keystrokes in the meantime.
### Improving developer experience
Ideally, p will “just work”.
But if not,
it is often in your project’s best interest to design a developer experience that *would* work if someone were using p.
That is – script out some of the most commonly used actions for your project (`install`, `test`, `deploy`, etc.),
and put them in a uniform place where contributors can easily figure out how to use them.
Now even the people who don't use p at least have a shot at getting up and running on their own.
### The search for a universal experience
For a long time I've been in search of the perfect development task manager to use on every project.
But that proved to be difficult as the repos got smaller,
more self-contained,
and spread across languages and dependency systems.
Using a Makefile is the closest thing to what I'm looking for.
Most people have `make`.
But there's a lot of things I just can't stand about it
(it's just ugly, and I can't help but think that it feels like some kind of *hack*).
I've settled on the idea of using a "scripts" folder with one-off files for each task.
Usually just bash scripts,
but can easily be a small Python script or something else.
These work basically everywhere,
and it's not hard to tell someone to do `./scripts/test`.
But even the "scripts" pattern doesn't make sense *on every project*.
Some frameworks/projects already come with a solution,
like pre-existing `package.json` "scripts".
Do we really want to create make `scripts/test` that just runs `npm run test`?
Seems dumb.
"I guess we'll use npm scripts on this project..."
So, every project inevitably ends up being a little bit different.
But for those of us that have to constantly jump around between those projects,
p smooths out the rough edges in our day-to-day,
and enables us to make per-project decisions about the developer experience
(and reminds us to even be thinking about that in the first place).
### Bonus: git hooks
Git hooks can be a super useful,
but confusing process to use.
The [gist](https://www.atlassian.com/git/tutorials/git-hooks#local-hooks) is that they generally aren't shared or set up for each user of a project automatically.
There are some tools like [pre-commit](https://pre-commit.com/) or [husky](https://github.com/typicode/husky) that really go the extra mile in creating a system for git hooks,
but a lot of our projects don't really warrant that and,
again,
it felt strange to now have a project dependency in that process...
Do we install that thing per-project even if the project doesn't use that language otherwise?
If we install it on our machines outside the project,
is that now a requirement that can't be required?
Is it even possible to run the hook/linter/formatter without that tool?
Anyway, p embraces git's (implied) attitude about hooks: they're optional.
If a user has p,
then we'll take an extra step to install the git hook for them and put things in place.
It's a nice-to-have.
If you don't have p, then at least you can still run your linters/formatters manually if you want (i.e. `npm run pre-commit`).
And if you need to *require* that those checks are run,
no matter who (or what) commits to the project?
Then set them up in CI.
You don't need anything special to do this --
just run your script/command as a step like a non-p user would.
It's not fancy,
and it works for us.
## Inspired by
- [Dropseed’s](https://github.com/dropseed) project-cli (private)
- [Flint Hills Design’s](https://github.com/flinthillsdesign) fhd-cli (private)
- [https://github.com/github/scripts-to-rule-them-all](https://github.com/github/scripts-to-rule-them-all)
- [https://github.com/bkeepers/strappydoo](https://github.com/bkeepers/strappydoo)
- having too many projects
%package help
Summary: Development documents and examples for p
Provides: python3-p-doc
%description help
## Why
### Context switching sucks
It can often take several minutes just to figure out how to *start* working on
something.
Every project is different, but damn near every project comes with a set of
development commands or scripts to run common actions. And if it doesn’t, then
it probably should.
Different languages, people, and tools accomplish this in different ways. Some
projects use the good ol’ `Makefile`, while others use `package.json` “scripts”,
bash scripts, `rake`, `fabric`, and so on and so on…
P was built to make it easier to jump between projects,
and to save some keystrokes in the meantime.
### Improving developer experience
Ideally, p will “just work”.
But if not,
it is often in your project’s best interest to design a developer experience that *would* work if someone were using p.
That is – script out some of the most commonly used actions for your project (`install`, `test`, `deploy`, etc.),
and put them in a uniform place where contributors can easily figure out how to use them.
Now even the people who don't use p at least have a shot at getting up and running on their own.
### The search for a universal experience
For a long time I've been in search of the perfect development task manager to use on every project.
But that proved to be difficult as the repos got smaller,
more self-contained,
and spread across languages and dependency systems.
Using a Makefile is the closest thing to what I'm looking for.
Most people have `make`.
But there's a lot of things I just can't stand about it
(it's just ugly, and I can't help but think that it feels like some kind of *hack*).
I've settled on the idea of using a "scripts" folder with one-off files for each task.
Usually just bash scripts,
but can easily be a small Python script or something else.
These work basically everywhere,
and it's not hard to tell someone to do `./scripts/test`.
But even the "scripts" pattern doesn't make sense *on every project*.
Some frameworks/projects already come with a solution,
like pre-existing `package.json` "scripts".
Do we really want to create make `scripts/test` that just runs `npm run test`?
Seems dumb.
"I guess we'll use npm scripts on this project..."
So, every project inevitably ends up being a little bit different.
But for those of us that have to constantly jump around between those projects,
p smooths out the rough edges in our day-to-day,
and enables us to make per-project decisions about the developer experience
(and reminds us to even be thinking about that in the first place).
### Bonus: git hooks
Git hooks can be a super useful,
but confusing process to use.
The [gist](https://www.atlassian.com/git/tutorials/git-hooks#local-hooks) is that they generally aren't shared or set up for each user of a project automatically.
There are some tools like [pre-commit](https://pre-commit.com/) or [husky](https://github.com/typicode/husky) that really go the extra mile in creating a system for git hooks,
but a lot of our projects don't really warrant that and,
again,
it felt strange to now have a project dependency in that process...
Do we install that thing per-project even if the project doesn't use that language otherwise?
If we install it on our machines outside the project,
is that now a requirement that can't be required?
Is it even possible to run the hook/linter/formatter without that tool?
Anyway, p embraces git's (implied) attitude about hooks: they're optional.
If a user has p,
then we'll take an extra step to install the git hook for them and put things in place.
It's a nice-to-have.
If you don't have p, then at least you can still run your linters/formatters manually if you want (i.e. `npm run pre-commit`).
And if you need to *require* that those checks are run,
no matter who (or what) commits to the project?
Then set them up in CI.
You don't need anything special to do this --
just run your script/command as a step like a non-p user would.
It's not fancy,
and it works for us.
## Inspired by
- [Dropseed’s](https://github.com/dropseed) project-cli (private)
- [Flint Hills Design’s](https://github.com/flinthillsdesign) fhd-cli (private)
- [https://github.com/github/scripts-to-rule-them-all](https://github.com/github/scripts-to-rule-them-all)
- [https://github.com/bkeepers/strappydoo](https://github.com/bkeepers/strappydoo)
- having too many projects
%prep
%autosetup -n p-1.4.0
%build
%py3_build
%install
%py3_install
install -d -m755 %{buildroot}/%{_pkgdocdir}
if [ -d doc ]; then cp -arf doc %{buildroot}/%{_pkgdocdir}; fi
if [ -d docs ]; then cp -arf docs %{buildroot}/%{_pkgdocdir}; fi
if [ -d example ]; then cp -arf example %{buildroot}/%{_pkgdocdir}; fi
if [ -d examples ]; then cp -arf examples %{buildroot}/%{_pkgdocdir}; fi
pushd %{buildroot}
if [ -d usr/lib ]; then
find usr/lib -type f -printf "\"/%h/%f\"\n" >> filelist.lst
fi
if [ -d usr/lib64 ]; then
find usr/lib64 -type f -printf "\"/%h/%f\"\n" >> filelist.lst
fi
if [ -d usr/bin ]; then
find usr/bin -type f -printf "\"/%h/%f\"\n" >> filelist.lst
fi
if [ -d usr/sbin ]; then
find usr/sbin -type f -printf "\"/%h/%f\"\n" >> filelist.lst
fi
touch doclist.lst
if [ -d usr/share/man ]; then
find usr/share/man -type f -printf "\"/%h/%f.gz\"\n" >> doclist.lst
fi
popd
mv %{buildroot}/filelist.lst .
mv %{buildroot}/doclist.lst .
%files -n python3-p -f filelist.lst
%dir %{python3_sitelib}/*
%files help -f doclist.lst
%{_docdir}/*
%changelog
* Thu Jun 08 2023 Python_Bot <Python_Bot@openeuler.org> - 1.4.0-1
- Package Spec generated
|
