Stylistic conflict with conventional command line flag passing

[rien333]

Although this app is very handy, I use it quite infrequently. Whenever I find a use case for it however, I almost always get the command line flags wrong because they break some very basic unixy command line flag passing conventions, for, I think, no apparent reason.

Any other command line utilty with long, verbose command line flags usually uses two dashes to pass them , e.g.: --ignore-errors (taken from the youtube-dl manual) . Some include an additional, but equivalent short hand notation as well, for when the user for example doesn't need the verbosity and already understands how the utility works: -i, --ignore-errors (again taken from youtube-dl)

So, as an example within the terminal-notifier options of adhering to the conventional pattern described above:

-m/--message VALUE    The notification message.

While the current terminal-notifier syntax does some kind of (imo ugly and hard to remember) hybrid both:

-message VALUE    The notification message.

Is there any reason for this choice? And would it be a good idea to add shorthand options? (typing message everytime is a bit long for example, and I'm a super bad speller) Of course, completely changing the syntax will break many scripts all over the place. To solve this, one could for example add a message that mentions that the old syntax is deprecated, for example. (other fixes are possible tho, such as leaving the old syntax in place, but documenting the conventional one)

[julienXX]

@rien333 This would be nice but it will be painful for all the scripts that use terminal-notifier. Since terminal-notifier is mostly used like this or as a dependency I would prefer to have both syntax available for a while. Would you be interested in submitting a pull request?

[rien333]

Yes, I might try whenever I find the time the coming week! Not 100% sure though.