WIP - ecs - install script

[ecshreve]

first pass at https://github.com/amonks/run/issues/94

did a little testing with this github actions workflow, but not sure the right way to get it in here

name: Test Install Script

on: [workflow_dispatch]

jobs:
  test-installation:
    strategy:
      matrix:
        os: [ubuntu-latest, macos-latest]
    runs-on: ${{ matrix.os }}
    steps:
      - name: Checkout code
        uses: actions/checkout@v3

      - name: Test Install Script
        run: |
          bash ./install.sh

      - name: Verify installation
        run: |
          if ! command -v run &> /dev/null; then
            if [ -f $HOME/.local/bin/run ]; then
              echo "run command is installed but not found in PATH."
              exit 0
            fi
            echo "run command is not installed or not found in PATH."
            exit 1
          else
            echo "run command is installed and found in PATH."
          fi

[amonks]

I did some research into this problem here: https://github.com/amonks/run/issues/94#issuecomment-2028923815

I think this script is useful, but, based on that research, I think it does a bit too much.

Plus I have some nits :)

[amonks]

FWIW: I'm using the #needs-thought label on issues to indicate that I'm unlikely to accept a PR without a lot of discussion. A first-pass PR is a great way to get that discussion started! But be warned: I will ask for changes without remorse.

Some people feel bad when they write code that isn't accepted, for labor-efficiency reasons. For those people, I'd recommend starting the discussion with a comment instead.

But I don't want to discourage you: if you're cool with rejection, keep throwing up PRs! It's definitely the most fun way to explore a design space, even if it isn't the most labor efficient. I'd do the same thing.

That is to say: thanks for kicking off this discussion! I'd love to work with you to get something merged, and I hope you aren't put off by all my feedback and opinions.

[ecshreve]

@amonks Thanks so much for taking the time to look at this, definitely not put off by the feedback at all, if anything I'm super appreciative and sorry if I made extra thinking time for you unnecessarily.

I'm trying to find a better workflow on my end where I can open a PR on a branch and work on the PR incrementally with the changes in the branch. If I open a PR in "draft" form is that enough to indicate "i don't expect anyone to review this, but this is something i'm looking at"? Or would it be better for me to keep things local and iterate on ideas in the issue discussion early on? Or could we enable PR labels in the repo and I could plop a "Not Ready for Review" label on WIP PRs? Interested in your thoughts on this.

I'm going to go ahead and close this PR and continue working on the change addressing #94 locally taking this PR feedback and your Issue comments into account. 🎉

[amonks]

sure; let's say from now on "draft" means "don't look at this unless you really extra feel like it"

(I don't have a lot going on right now, so I might, in practice, feel like looking at drafts, but that's me actively doing something know I don't need to, so you're not allowed to feel bad about creating extra work)

[amonks]

@ecshreve

tell me if I'm off base, but I think there might be a dynamic here where,

1. I really enjoy reading code and leaving comments, so I'm gonna do it whether or not I'm "supposed to", and then I end up feeling bad about leaving comments you might not have wanted and I write a semi-apology
2. you really enjoy writing code, so you're gonna do it whether or not you're "supposed to", and then you feel bad about creating "review work" I might not have wanted and you write a semi-apology

if so, the solution is: let's keep doing what we enjoy, and, as friends, choose not to feel bad about it :)

[ecshreve]

perfect, sounds like a plan to me!