Rename default bashly.yml to commands.yml

[meleu]

The conversation here made me wonder if commands.yml would be a better name for what we currently call bashly.yml.

Maybe doing something similar to what we have for settings:

• path set in BASHLY_COMMANDS_PATH
• src/bashly-commands.yml
• src/commands.yml

---

The reason for this is because after reading @DannyBen saying

Anything that does not belong to Command does not belong in bashly.yml.

My mental model of what bashly.yml is was slightly reconfigured. Now I have a feeling that my understanding of "how Bashly works" is a bit clearer.

[DannyBen]

I think we should be careful not to allow over-configuration. Remember that this is not a general purpose linux CLI, but rather a dedicated tool that needs a structured workspace, with files in the expected locations to function.

The configuration file lives with the partial scripts that it represents - this is the recommended and default. If someone wants to call it something else, they still can.

Regarding changing the name - it does not make sense to me.

This file is the foundation of your script, and is the entry point for the bashly CLI. It is the single most important pillar.
It does not have the same standing as settings.yml. The Settings mechanism, is just for tweaks. Most of my scripts are done without it, since I believe the defaults are the right values for most people. So the point I am trying to emphasize here is that these two files - while being YAML - are not in the same "league" and should not get the same treatment.

Finally, this is the kind of change that if you ask 5 different people how they think it should be named, you will get 4-8 different answers. So personally, I feel it currently has the right name and location.

[pcrockett]

i'd like to hear more about real-world impact for questions like this. otherwise we risk making changes for change's sake.

i personally have opinions about how i'd do things differently, but everyone has opinions, and the current system seems to work with little actual real-world friction.

[meleu]

I think I didn't express myself very well, and my request may look like a "change for change's sake". my bad here.

Although mentioned in the OP, I'm not really interested in changing the file location, but just the name.

What I'm actually interested is to explicitly show to newcomers that the bashly.yml is actually the "commands configuration" file. It's like an interface contract between our program and the user.

I think my bias in favor of the commands.yml name is because, even after 9 months of intense use of bashly, I had a feeling of a better understanding of how it works when I realized that "anything that does not belong to Command does not belong in bashly.yml."

If renaming is out of question, we could find other ways to make explicit to newcomers that the file created by bashly init is their commands interface configuration.

[DannyBen]

Renaming bashly.yml is unlikely to happen at this time. I believe it is the right name to represent its significance, and there is already a small ecosystem around it, like schemas, VS code extensions etc.

As for the fact that bashly.yml represents the root command, I thought it was stated clearly enough in the docs.
Specifically in How it Works, and in the Configuration > Command document, although not as explicitly.

If there is any rephrasing needed anywhere in the docs, without overexplaining it, I am open to it.