feat(commands): add 'deprecate' command

[noelleleigh]

This PR adds tink deprecate as a command, based on the functionality of npm deprecate.

Code ported from: https://github.com/npm/cli/blob/9a564a55c016642bff3e4ae58ed05a0d6370aaf3/lib/deprecate.js

Changes:

• Currently does not use otplease as it is not included in tink yet.
• Removed explicit checking for <message> argument, since yargs performs that validation now.
• Added figgy-pudding config based on the contents of org.jsx, though no explicit logging is implemented yet.

Tested conditions:

• tink deprecate <pkg>[@<version>] <message>
• tink deprecate <pkg>[@<version>]
• tink deprecate <pkg> <message>
• tink deprecate <pkg>[@<malformedversion>] <message>

Since I don't have an npm account, I just get to the last step of the process before receiving an HTTP 401 Unauthorized response. Is there a test registry that is used for API testing, or should I just work on the main one?

[zkat]

How do you feel about pulling in otplease?

[zkat]

Looks fine if it works as-is! I'm surprised by yargs magic sometimes

[zkat]

This is so strange. Is this seriously handled just like that by yargs?!

[noelleleigh]

I first thought I would have to manually join the package name and the version, but then I ran the debugger and spotted that:

Fortunately it seems to work the way we want, but even the yargs docs don't seem to document what happens when two positional arguments are character-separated instead of whitespace-separated. I can't find a more comprehensive document for how it parses command templates.

[zkat]

mind=blown

[legodude17]

From what I can tell from the code it seems to just consider those cases as one positional argument, which makes sense.

[noelleleigh]

How do you feel about pulling in otplease?

I could definitely give it a shot tomorrow.

[zkat]

One more thing: I just pushed test/ping.js as an example of writing network tests for tink. Would you mind adding test cases for this and getting the command some decent coverage %? (if not 100%)? It should be fairly straightforward if you base it off the ping test.

[noelleleigh]

re: otplease

cli/lib/utils/otplease.js depends on cli/lib/utils/read-user-info.js for its otp() method.
Should I:

1. Bring over the entirety of read-user-info.js (add read and npm-user-validate to dependencies), or

2. Just bring over otp() (only have to add read to dependencies)?

[zkat]

Just pull in what you need. We don't need all of read-user-info.js tbh. Just a simple prompter that can be just as easily hand-rolled. Or written with ink.

[noelleleigh]

One more thing: I just pushed test/ping.js as an example of writing network tests for tink. Would you mind adding test cases for this and getting the command some decent coverage %? (if not 100%)? It should be fairly straightforward if you base it off the ping test.

I added tests for deprecate based on the current npm cli tests: https://github.com/npm/cli/blob/9a564a55c016642bff3e4ae58ed05a0d6370aaf3/test/tap/deprecate.js

The only coverage that's missing is the Deprecate.builder function, which I'm not sure how to test.

otplease also needs to be tested.

[zkat]

This is amazing, thank you! Consider this command done! 🎉