Add format option to server ls command

[john801205]

Ref: rancher/rancher#48169

Summary

This PR allows users to specify format for the server ls command.

Usage

$ make build
$ ./bin/rancher server ls -h
List all servers

Usage:
  rancher server ls [OPTIONS]

Options:
   --format value  'json', 'yaml' or Custom format: '{{.Name}} {{.URL}}'
$ ./bin/rancher server ls --format '{{.Name}}'
beta
prod

[crobby]

fairly straightforward change, but can you add a unit test for this as well?

[john801205]

fairly straightforward change, but can you add a unit test for this as well?

@crobby
Do you want me to add some unit test for the returned configuration object cli.Command?
Otherwise, we already have some unit tests for the main logic here. We just don't allow the flag from the command line now.

cli/cmd/server_test.go

Lines 230 to 237 in f5d2eaa

	{
	name: "list servers with custom format",
	format: "{{.URL}}",
	expectedOutput: `https://myserver-1.com
	https://myserver-2.com
	https://myserver-3.com
	`,
	},

[crobby]

fairly straightforward change, but can you add a unit test for this as well?

@crobby Do you want me to add some unit test for the returned configuration object cli.Command? Otherwise, we already have some unit tests for the main logic here. We just don't allow the flag from the command line now.

cli/cmd/server_test.go

Lines 230 to 237 in f5d2eaa

	{
	name: "list servers with custom format",
	format: "{{.URL}}",
	expectedOutput: `https://myserver-1.com
	https://myserver-2.com
	https://myserver-3.com
	`,
	},

If you can add something like that, I think there is at least some value in it. I do agree that the "main logic" is indeed already tested here.

[john801205]

If you can add something like that, I think there is at least some value in it. I do agree that the "main logic" is indeed already tested here.

@crobby Sure, just added. Also, I set the functions inside the object to nil to skip checking since it's not possible to check if they are equal at this moment.

[pmatseykanets]

TBH I'm not sure why we need such a test. This is brittle and doesn't really test any functionality. I'd rather not have it at all.
/cc @crobby

[crobby]

I see your point. Maybe it would be fine to just remove the test and merge as it was.

[pmatseykanets]

@john801205 Sorry for the back-and-forth. Can you please revert the unit test changes and we'll merge the PR?

[john801205]

Sure, no problem. I have reverted the change.

[pmatseykanets]

Thank you!