search

tldr-pages / tldr

📚 Collaborative cheatsheets for console commands
https://tldr.sh
Other
49.28k stars 4.06k forks source link

Reach parity with cheat cheatsheets #3689

Open waldyrious opened 4 years ago

waldyrious commented 4 years ago

At the time of writing, the cheat repository has 39 pages that we don't seem to have yet in tldr-pages:

We should create them to reach parity!

For context, see #266.

Mouvedia commented 4 years ago

markdown is probably not on scope, it's not a binary per se.

waldyrious commented 4 years ago

Good point, @Mouvedia — I'll strike that one out.

sbrl commented 4 years ago

I think this issue would be a great one to pin.

ivanhercaz commented 4 years ago

I will keep this list in mind for the next contributions. Thank you for this compilation @waldyrious!

waldyrious commented 4 years ago

Thank you for this compilation @waldyrious!

You can thank Venny for doing most of the work ;)

sbrl commented 4 years ago

Looks like we're at our max of 3 issues though, so it might have to wait until another one is closed.

zlatanvasovic commented 4 years ago

@sbrl I'd rather have the branding one(s) pinned first.

sbrl commented 4 years ago

I think the idea of the pinned issues here is to give people some ideas as to some commands they can create pages for - we've always had a handful of meta tracking issues for lists of commands. See #1579 and #2213 for example :-)

waldyrious commented 4 years ago

I have a sense that the branding issue is going to be closed soon anyway (please voice your thoughts there if you haven't yet), so it will cease being a problem ;)

ivanhercaz commented 4 years ago

I have some doubts about how to write the pages for some of these. For example, deb isn't a command, is a package format, and in its respective cheatsheet there are examples of how to work with deb, like how to extract the files inside a deb package and how to install it. What should be written in the pages? Examples of how to work with this kind of packages?

And, what about in the case of ansi, readline and stdout?

Mouvedia commented 4 years ago

strike them and move on

zlatanvasovic commented 4 years ago

I striked all those out, plus asciiart. We need to revisit all the listed ones, there are surely more to be striked out.

ivanhercaz commented 4 years ago

@Mouvedia, @zdroid, thank you for your answers. I will review each command to know if I can contribute writing its page or discard it of this list striking it.

ivanhercaz commented 4 years ago

I edited the issue and splitted systemd in three commands: systemd, systemctl and systemd-analyze. The cheatsheet includes the last two commands and we already have them (you can check the links to the files). However, systemd has its own man page, as the another ones, so it is pending to be written.

I don't know if the way in which I add this information to the issue is the chosen one, if not, correct my edit please.

P.S. Please, check hardware-info point. It isn't a command, it is a cheatsheet with different commands to get hardware information. We have most of them, with the exception of the find command in Linux.

waldyrious commented 4 years ago

That's a great way to format the list, @ivanhercaz. Maybe we could add the platform prefix and the .md suffix to the links to tldr pages, so we can better distinguish them from the cheat cheatsheets. I'd also propose that as we add the missing pages, we link to them as sub-list items like you did, rather than just add a check to the box, so that it's easy for others to validate whether the content we have is complete or could be expanded with stuff from the cheatsheets.

ivanhercaz commented 4 years ago

That's a great way to format the list, @ivanhercaz. Maybe we could add the platform prefix and the .md suffix to the links to tldr pages, so we can better distinguish them from the cheat cheatsheets.

That sounds really nice. I will add the platform prefix and the .md suffix. I will change it now.

I'd also propose that as we add the missing pages, we link to them as sub-list items like you did, rather than just add a check to the box, so that it's easy for others to validate whether the content we have is complete or could be expanded with stuff from the cheatsheets.

All right. Good proposal. I will add them as soon as possible. Although now I am going to add the one made by @andrik (cpdf), as an example.

waldyrious commented 4 years ago

Although now I am going to add the one made by @andrik (cpdf), as an example.

Just to clarify, I meant adding these as sub-lists as well (with a single entry) rather than as notes in parenthesis in the same line as the cheatsheet, so that the formatting is consistent with the ones that correspond to multiple pages, and also to avoid mixing up with the notes for the entries that aren't really commands. Does that make sense?

zlatanvasovic commented 4 years ago

systemd doesn't exist as a command itself in the cheatsheets (but it is present on Linux). I think it should be ticked aswell.

Note: I made a PR for cheat command and noted it in the description.

waldyrious commented 4 years ago

Note: I made a PR for cheat command

Link for reference: #3721

and noted it in the description

I don't understand what you mean by this. Can you clarify?

zlatanvasovic commented 4 years ago

Note: I made a PR for cheat command

Link for reference: #3721

and noted it in the description

I don't understand what you mean by this. Can you clarify?

I added it to this issue's description.

waldyrious commented 4 years ago

D'oh! 🤦‍♂ thanks for clarifying.

sbrl commented 4 years ago

Surely we have a page for find? It's in common. It's in common because it's present on more than 1 platform - linux being one of them.

ivanhercaz commented 4 years ago

Although now I am going to add the one made by @andrik (cpdf), as an example.

Just to clarify, I meant adding these as sub-lists as well (with a single entry) rather than as notes in parenthesis in the same line as the cheatsheet, so that the formatting is consistent with the ones that correspond to multiple pages, and also to avoid mixing up with the notes for the entries that aren't really commands. Does that make sense?

Oh, yes! That's make sense. I will adapt it as you commented.

Surely we have a page for find? It's in common. It's in common because it's present on more than 1 platform - linux being one of them.

It is in common but it seems to be a different command from the Linux on, at least checking both.

Mouvedia commented 4 years ago

If we are adding trashy, we should remove linux/trash which is a duplicate of common/trash-cli.

sbrl commented 4 years ago

I'm not sure that linux/trash would be a duplicate of common/trash-cli. They sound like different commands. Technically, I'd be in favour of deleting trash-cli and replacing it with multiple pages - 1 for each command it mentions.

The basic form of tldr is tldr command - hence 1 page per command.

npalladium commented 3 years ago

We should reach parity for slurm once #4689 and #4646 are merged.

nath1as commented 1 year ago

adding trashy https://github.com/tldr-pages/tldr/pull/8749

EmilyGraceSeville7cf commented 1 year ago

org-mode possibly can't be added as it's cheat-sheet doesn't describe CLI, but commands inside this mode.

ethanbarry commented 9 months ago

AppArmor is a package that provides commands like aa-enabled and aa-enforce. Do I need to create an apparmor page, or just pages for the individual commands?

kbdharun commented 9 months ago

AppArmor is a package that provides commands like aa-enabled and aa-enforce. Do I need to create an apparmor page, or just pages for the individual commands?

You could create a main page referring to the subcommand pages in this case.

Note: We already have some AppArmor pages as far as I can remember. So check if the page exists before creating a PR (feel free to edit them if you have any modifications).