Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Wildcard naming is verbose and doesn't match docs #211

Closed
transitive-bullshit opened this issue Jan 6, 2020 · 3 comments · Fixed by #212
Closed

Wildcard naming is verbose and doesn't match docs #211

transitive-bullshit opened this issue Jan 6, 2020 · 3 comments · Fixed by #212

Comments

@transitive-bullshit
Copy link
Contributor

Same issue as #148 though I will include a better description & repro case.

Problem: if you use the npm: or yarn: wildcard syntax, the docs say we should get only the shortened wildcard portion of the commands as labels, but in reality this is broken and we get the full, verbose version of the commands, including the non-wildcard prefix.

Here is a bare-bones repro example. It just uses the wildcard syntax to call echo.js which just logs its argv once a second.

Here is the current output:

$ concurrently yarn:start-*
$ node echo.js foo
$ node echo.js bar
[start-foo] foo
[start-bar] bar
[start-bar] bar
[start-foo] foo
[start-bar] bar
[start-foo] foo

Here is the expected and desired output:

$ concurrently yarn:start-*
$ node echo.js foo
$ node echo.js bar
[foo] foo
[bar] bar
[bar] bar
[foo] foo
[bar] bar
[foo] foo

This clearly does the opposite of what was intended and described in the project's readme.

#165 looks like the correct fix, but it is out of date. @gustavohenke if you'll accept an updated PR, I'm happy to resolve this for you.

Thanks!

@gustavohenke
Copy link
Member

if you'll accept an updated PR, I'm happy to resolve this for you.

Sure thing! ❤️

@AmmarArnt
Copy link

Did this get broken in a newer release? I am running version 7.1.0 and I get the pre-wildcard description in the terminal:[_start-*subscriptions]

@gustavohenke
Copy link
Member

Following up on #312.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

3 participants