feat: make apps init interactive by default, simplify flow#5112
feat: make apps init interactive by default, simplify flow#5112jamesbroadhead wants to merge 2 commits intomainfrom
Conversation
- Add --interactive flag (default true) replacing implicit flagsMode.
Passing --name or --deploy now pre-fills values while still showing
prompts. Use --interactive=false to skip all prompts.
- Remove the description prompt from the interactive flow (--description
flag still works for explicit use).
- Auto-fill lakebase database branch with "production" instead of
prompting.
- Don't auto-run the app after creation; always print the next-steps
command instead.
- Generate a default project name ("my-app", "my-app-1", etc.) when
--interactive=false and --name is not provided.
Co-authored-by: Isaac
Approval status: pending
|
- Validate required resources in both interactive and non-interactive paths: in interactive mode, --plugins preselection skips the prompt step and previously also skipped validation, so apps could be scaffolded with no warehouse configured. - Reject empty --set values: the prefix check accepted "p.r.id=" as if a value had been supplied. - Error when --interactive is true (default) but the terminal does not support prompts, instead of silently auto-generating "my-app" and using defaults for every other prompted field. - generateProjectName now treats only os.ErrNotExist as "available"; permission/IO errors no longer pick a name that may collide with an inaccessible directory. Bound the loop at 1000 to avoid pathological spins. Co-authored-by: Isaac
pkosiec
left a comment
pkosiec
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
A few comments. Adding --interactive flag and removing app description prompt are good additions, same with generating the app name (I'd add it to the interactive flow too) 👍
| @@ -182,56 +159,38 @@ func PromptForProjectName(ctx context.Context, outputDir string) (string, error) | |||
| return name, nil | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| // PromptForDeployAndRun prompts for post-creation deploy and run options. | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Not sure about this: on one hand you're right, it simplifies the flow, on the other, we make the remote bridge option almost impossible to find 🤔
Maybe let's remove the description as you did and keep the run options as they were before?
| @@ -180,8 +170,9 @@ Environment variables: | |||
| cmd.Flags().StringSliceVar(&pluginsFlag, "plugins", nil, "Alias for --features") | |||
| _ = cmd.Flags().MarkHidden("plugins") | |||
| cmd.Flags().BoolVar(&deploy, "deploy", false, "Deploy the app after creation") | |||
| cmd.Flags().StringVar(&run, "run", "", "Run the app after creation (none, dev, dev-remote)") | |||
| cmd.Flags().BoolVar(&autoApprove, "auto-approve", false, "Skip confirmation prompts for optional resources. Optional resources are only configured when their values are provided via --set.") | |||
| cmd.Flags().StringVar(&run, "run", "", "Deprecated: auto-run removed, use 'databricks apps dev' after init") | |||
| _ = cmd.Flags().MarkDeprecated("run", "auto-run has been removed; use 'databricks apps dev' after init") | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
As posted already, I'd revert this to keep the run options, mostly to promote the remote bridge option 👍
| } | ||
|
|
||
| // defaultDatabaseBranch is the Lakebase branch used for all new apps. | ||
| const defaultDatabaseBranch = "production" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We cannot do this, because not all projects have production branch. Brand-new ones - yes, older - not necessarily. Another reason I'd keep the branch selection as it is - an app might be initialized for a dev/preview environment, which could be a different branch but still the same project.
Also, as a side note, I don't think the changes was tested:
- The branch is a full path, not just a name (that's how the Lakebase API is designed)
- When I built the CLI and tried to select the Lakebase project, nothing shows up.
On this PR:
On latest CLI:
| return err | ||
| if isInteractive { | ||
| // Prompt includes validation for name format AND directory existence | ||
| name, err := prompt.PromptForProjectName(ctx, opts.outputDir) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Maybe we can go a step further and allow users to press "enter" and move past the "app name" step if nothing is provided?
So we could generate the name upfront, and user could accept it or put theirs own.
What do you think?
| // modes: interactive prompts may have been skipped (e.g. --plugins preselected | ||
| // without --features), and an empty --set value would otherwise pass the |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't think there is a --plugin flag?
2 participants
Summary
--interactiveflag (defaulttrue) replacing implicit flags-mode.--nameand--deploynow pre-fill values while still showing prompts. Use--interactive=falsefor fully non-interactive mode.--descriptionflag still works).--runflag.my-app,my-app-1, etc.) when--interactive=falseand--namenot provided.Test plan
go test ./cmd/apps/ ./libs/apps/prompt/)--interactiveflag default,generateProjectNamewith suffix bumpingdatabricks apps initshows interactive promptsdatabricks apps init --name fooshows interactive prompts with name pre-filleddatabricks apps init --interactive=falsegenerates project with defaultsThis pull request was AI-assisted by Isaac.