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

Bash and / or Zsh completion #55

Open
1 task done
emekdahl-palmetto opened this issue Dec 13, 2021 · 1 comment
Open
1 task done

Bash and / or Zsh completion #55

emekdahl-palmetto opened this issue Dec 13, 2021 · 1 comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request

Comments

@emekdahl-palmetto
Copy link
Contributor

emekdahl-palmetto commented Dec 13, 2021

Context
What are you trying to do and how would you want to do it differently? Is it something you currently cannot do?

I want to have the same bash / zsh completion when I shell in using docker that I would on my local

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
A clear and concise description of what the problem is. Ex. I'm always frustrated when [...]

I want to run commands as fast as I can on my local dbt project outside of docker and have access to the history

Describe the solution you'd like
A clear and concise description of what you want to happen.

Something like this in the docker file? This is just an inspiration not an implementation.

RUN echo 'source /usr/share/bash-completion/bash_completion' >> /etc/bash.bashrc

Describe alternatives you've considered
A clear and concise description of any alternative solutions or features you've considered.

Additional context
Add any other context or screenshots about the feature request here.

Is there an existing feature request for this?

  • I have searched the existing issues
@emekdahl-palmetto emekdahl-palmetto added the enhancement New feature or request label Dec 13, 2021
@jakeberesford-palmetto
Copy link
Collaborator

Implementing this requires shell-specific changes to the Dockerfile, depending on the team/user's shell of choice. Different shells would require different implementations and I don't think I've ever seen a totally successful one. Implementations I've seen use COPY to pull in the shell profile, some use volume mounts, and some require apt-get to install the shell and any dependencies.

I think these changes would be within the scope of each project, rather than palm-cli.

One thing to keep in mind that the built image would be created with the local user's config, so an image built in CI and deployed to prod would have a different shell setup than the images built locally. And images built on my machine would no longer be the same as images built on yours. I prefer to have a minimal but consistent shell setup across all images, to reduce frustration when debugging a deployed image or production issue.

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

No branches or pull requests

2 participants