Warn when an unknown config key is set #2183
Conversation
pkg/cmd/config/config.go
Outdated
| "github.com/spf13/cobra" | ||
| ) | ||
|
|
||
| type ConfigKey struct { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Minor: I would say that this type need not be exported
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Cool, I will change it (I realised it while coding, but thought we were not exactly following the exported-unexported convention, so did not unexport it 😅 )
| knownKey := false | ||
| for _, configKey := range respectedConfigKeys { | ||
| if key == configKey.name { | ||
| knownKey = true | ||
| break | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
| if !knownKey { | ||
| iostreams := f.IOStreams | ||
| warningIcon := iostreams.ColorScheme().WarningIcon() | ||
| fmt.Fprintf(iostreams.ErrOut, "%s warning: '%s' is not a known configuration key\n", warningIcon, key) | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What are your thoughts on moving this code into cfg.Set? We have another PR that is doing config value validation (#2138) and I think it would be nice to have both the key and value validations residing in the same place.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm actually fine with this being here and not within Set() since it's only a warning. Other potential callers of the Set() function should be able to set arbitrary keys without it resulting in a warning printed on stderr.
Although, I do agree with @samcoe that this check is similar to config value validation and could thus live in the config package. Perhaps for now, the logic that searches for a key being among respectedConfigKeys could be moved to the config package and invoked from here like config.IsSupportedConfig(key).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Okay. So I think lets wait for #2138 to get merged, then we can decide how we need to go forward with this. I agree that it would be better to keep the validations together, now that we are validating the values also
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Just wanted to update here that I merged in #2138 👍
|
#2138 is merged! You are welcome to bring |
|
@AliabbasMerchant Leave as-is; please! Thank you for your contribution so far 🙏 |
It's better to set this per-host in general, since setting the top-level `git_protocol` key will not have any effect if the per-host setting exists, and it does by default for anyone who ran `auth login`.
Summary
closes #855