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

Command-line option "--bare" has no effect in "sync" and "clean" actions #3041

Closed
cubranic opened this issue Oct 15, 2018 · 6 comments
Closed
Labels
good first issue Issues suitable as a newcomer to get familiar with Pipenv! help wanted Type: Enhancement 💡 This is a feature or enhancement request.

Comments

@cubranic
Copy link

Issue description

The --bare flag is supposed to set "minimal output" in sync and clean, but I don't see any difference with and without it. Looking at the code implementing those actions, I see bare in the list of parameters for do_sync and do_clean, but they are not used anywhere in the body of those functions.

Expected result

No output when --bare is used in pipenv sync.

@techalchemy
Copy link
Member

Yep, that's definitely right. It's been at the back of my mind to do something about this for awhile but there is a pretty sizeable project to tackle around output cleanup in general

@techalchemy techalchemy added Type: Enhancement 💡 This is a feature or enhancement request. help wanted good first issue Issues suitable as a newcomer to get familiar with Pipenv! labels Oct 16, 2018
@frostming
Copy link
Contributor

I think the meaning of 'bare' here is to run the command on itself, instead of called by other commands. So if you run pipenv sync, the 'bare' flag should be True by default.

Just to share what is in my head.

@cubranic
Copy link
Author

@frostming Check the help text for the --bare option: that demonstrably is not what it is intended to be.
Then look at any other command where it's actually functional. There are various lines where status is printed wrapped in if not bare:.

@frostming
Copy link
Contributor

@cubranic ya you are right. I didn't check source code thoroughly.

@jcrotts
Copy link
Contributor

jcrotts commented Oct 19, 2018

Opened a PR for this, I think it addresses the behavior you described @cubranic .

@techalchemy
Copy link
Member

This was closed in #3126 by way of #3064 and will be in the next release, thanks @jcrotts!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
good first issue Issues suitable as a newcomer to get familiar with Pipenv! help wanted Type: Enhancement 💡 This is a feature or enhancement request.
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants