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

query multiple registries at once, format tables #1

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: archives-tools
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

volodymyrss
Copy link

@volodymyrss volodymyrss commented Aug 24, 2023

I made tables continuous, it's better for us like that.
Also registry query is of little use as it is now. Best would be to make a two-stage query.
But as of now, I propose to check over all found registries until something is found, this makes some sense. But I move no-registry case higher since it's better.

I saw that you made some changes after, I did not see the commit, I am not sure the impact.

@volodymyrss
Copy link
Author

see @francoismg I even added here a TODO for argparse. Please have a look on this so we can have a first complete version. There are probably some issues due to merge with last commit.

@francoismg
Copy link
Owner

see @francoismg I even added here a TODO for argparse. Please have a look on this so we can have a first complete version. There are probably some issues due to merge with last commit.

yes thanks I didnt received any notification about that yesterday

thanks for the changes, I looked at them and there will be some merge conflicts yea will check that and push the new version with argparse

@volodymyrss
Copy link
Author

Did you follow this no-argparse but inputs.json approach suggested? Seems nice, does it make sense?

@francoismg
Copy link
Owner

Did you follow this no-argparse but inputs.json approach suggested? Seems nice, does it make sense?

yes was looking into it, seems good will be more portable, maintainable and less buggy than the endless line of parameters.

Didn't find much tool using that approach but it's probably cause it really makes sense when you have a huge number of parameter which most tools don't.

@volodymyrss
Copy link
Author

Did you follow this no-argparse but inputs.json approach suggested? Seems nice, does it make sense?

yes was looking into it, seems good will be more portable, maintainable and less buggy than the endless line of parameters.

Didn't find much tool using that approach but it's probably cause it really makes sense when you have a huge number of parameter which most tools don't.

there is this example from the doc.

Maybe I'd make a argparse.Namespace object out of it to make compatible treatment. Or maybe just a namedtuple.

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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants