Add validate command and validate commands before running with provided schema

[JamesLMilner]

Feature

The following has been addressed in the PR:

• [x] There is a related issue
• [x] All code has been formatted with prettier as per the readme code style guidelines
• [x] Unit or Functional tests are included in the PR

Description:

Resolves #241

This should allow commands to be validated against a validation schema that is provided in the command source (at the moment it's named rc-schema.json but we could go with something else). If no config is provided validation will skip for the command.

[codecov[bot]]

Codecov Report

Merging #243 into master will increase coverage by 0.1%. The diff coverage is 95.31%.

@@            Coverage Diff            @@
##           master     #243     +/-   ##
=========================================
+ Coverage   94.16%   94.26%   +0.1%     
=========================================
  Files          20       21      +1     
  Lines         600      663     +63     
  Branches       95      104      +9     
=========================================
+ Hits          565      625     +60     
- Misses         17       18      +1     
- Partials       18       20      +2

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
src/configurationHelper.ts	96.77% <100%> (+0.1%)	:arrow_up:
src/command.ts	94.44% <100%> (ø)	:arrow_up:
src/commands/validate.ts	95.16% <95.16%> (ø)

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data Powered by Codecov. Last update 14f3c88...1b81702. Read the comment docs.

[JamesLMilner]

Windows error is:

    at describe (C:\Users\James\Documents\Code\intern-test\james\cli\dist\dev\tests\unit\commands\validate.js:83:31)
    at registerSuite (C:\Users\James\Documents\Code\intern-test\james\cli\node_modules\intern\lib\interfaces\tdd.js:73:9)
    at _suite (C:\Users\James\Documents\Code\intern-test\james\cli\node_modules\intern\lib\interfaces\tdd.js:85:13)
    at suite (C:\Users\James\Documents\Code\intern-test\james\cli\node_modules\intern\lib\interfaces\tdd.js:58:24)
    at describe (C:\Users\James\Documents\Code\intern-test\james\cli\dist\dev\tests\unit\commands\validate.js:81:9)
    at registerSuite (C:\Users\James\Documents\Code\intern-test\james\cli\node_modules\intern\lib\interfaces\tdd.js:73:9)
    at _suite (C:\Users\James\Documents\Code\intern-test\james\cli\node_modules\intern\lib\interfaces\tdd.js:85:13)
    at suite (C:\Users\James\Documents\Code\intern-test\james\cli\node_modules\intern\lib\interfaces\tdd.js:58:24)
    at describe (C:\Users\James\Documents\Code\intern-test\james\cli\dist\dev\tests\unit\commands\validate.js:76:5)
    at registerSuite (C:\Users\James\Documents\Code\intern-test\james\cli\node_modules\intern\lib\interfaces\tdd.js:73:9)
  message: 'expected \'tests\\\\support\\\\validate\\\\rc-schema.json\' to equal \'tests/support/validate/rc-schema.json\'',
  showDiff: true,
  actual: 'tests\\support\\validate\\rc-schema.json',
  expected: 'tests/support/validate/rc-schema.json',
  reported: true }

[agubler]

@JamesMilnerUK I’ve been thinking about the command validation and general API, which are different to how you’ve currently implemented it....

I’ve been thinking that we should provide a json schema validation function via the helper and the command API for validate should be a function instead of a boolean.

In the validate function commands would/could use the provided json schema validation function from the CLI. This would make the validation flexible as a command can run completely bespoke validation or extra validation on top of the basic schema validation. It would also mean that you should have to worry about paths for the command.

[agubler]

General note, do you think that we need to report successful validation for each command? Especially when running the command (as the user doesn't actually need to know that it is validated before running)... for the validate built in I agree we should return a general, "All you commands are configured correctly" or what have you.

[JamesLMilner]

@agubler as it stands each command is responsible for deciding if silentSuccess should be set. If that's set to true then nothing will log on success regardless of how the validate command is run. Because we invert the control to the command to setup validate, we would have to say it's just best practice to set that to false for installable commands, if that makes sense.