Split CLI: fowld and fowl

[meejah]

Start with some README / documentation changes -- ultimately this will split the CLI into two programs, fowld and fowl.

[meejah]

CC @balejk although there isn't a lot here yet, you're the inspiration to start doing this so would value any feedback :)

[balejk]

Thank you for pinging me. Like I wrote, I will unfortunately probably not have much time to participate too actively in the near future, but I will be happy if you will be so kind and keep me in the loop if possible. Either way, it's great to see some progress again!

[balejk]

Yeah, trying it out for Pear-On -- do you know if there's a migration script etc?

I found this [1], it doesn't seem to be actively maintained nowadays but the author is one of Soucehut staff which is why I think it might be a good candidate for trying out. And also maybe this [2], which however also doesn't seem to get much attention now. You can find a third similar project mentioned at the bottom of the latter's README.

(Don't have a lot of PRs or Issues on this repo, but would love to give this a go as a test-migration....)

Yes, that's exactly why I thought that if you were ever to move it, now would be the best time.

[1] https://sr.ht/~emersion/gh2srht/ [2] https://git.sr.ht/~jman/github-migrate-tool

[meejah]

Great, thanks!

Maybe I'll wait until DDoS is "definitely over" before I bug any srht staff ;) but I would like to move e.g. https://github.com/meejah/txtorcon "somewhere else" too (but it has enough ticket / PR history that I'd like to properly migrate it ideally).

[balejk]

but I would like to move e.g. https://github.com/meejah/txtorcon "somewhere else" too (but it has enough ticket / PR history that I'd like to properly migrate it ideally).

Well, that's why it's a good practice to use commit messages properly ;-) (although of course those will not hold the discussion/PR history either).

I'm actually not sure how old PRs would be migrated -- other than re-posting them all as patch series' on the mailing list. However, it seems that the only ones that are currently open are authored by yourself so you can just push them into respective branches on the new remote without having to worry about write priviliges or asking the authors to send further versions via email as series'. Well, actually, you could probably also handle such PRs as "native" git PRs.

[balejk]

It is great to see this get merged! Hopefully I will be able to try it out soon. Thank you very much for the work :-)

[meejah]

Would be great to hear any feedback (things that don't work, documentation that's still wrong ;) as tickets or whatever is appropriate. Thanks!

[balejk]

Are you keeping the outdated protocol.rst for reference or can it be removed?

[balejk]

How about this

diff --git a/src/fowl/cli.py b/src/fowl/cli.py
index ece5ad5..08ea908 100644
--- a/src/fowl/cli.py
+++ b/src/fowl/cli.py
@@ -92,7 +92,7 @@ def fowld(ctx, ip_privacy, mailbox, debug):
     "--local", "-L",
     multiple=True,
     help="Listen locally, connect remotely (accepted multiple times)",
-    metavar="listen-port[:connect-port]",
+    metavar="listen-port[:remote-port]",
 )
 @click.option(
     "--remote", "-R",

or maybe even better this

diff --git a/src/fowl/cli.py b/src/fowl/cli.py
index ece5ad5..9c50d3c 100644
--- a/src/fowl/cli.py
+++ b/src/fowl/cli.py
@@ -98,7 +98,7 @@ def fowld(ctx, ip_privacy, mailbox, debug):
     "--remote", "-R",
     multiple=True,
     help="Listen remotely, connect locally (accepted multiple times)",
-    metavar="listen-port[:local-port]",
+    metavar="listen-port[:connect-port]",
 )
 @click.option(
     "--allow",

? I find the current wording a bit confusing/inconsistent.

[meejah]

want to state that as a PR?

[balejk]

Pushed a commit to the typos PR. Also changed it for --allow.