| ▲ | nine_k 4 days ago |
| Nice. And the `pussh` command definitely deserves the distinction of one of the most elegant puns: easy to remember, self-explanatory, and just one letter away from its sister standard command. |
|
| ▲ | gchamonlive 4 days ago | parent | next [-] |
| It's fine, but it wouldn't hurt to have a more formal alias like `docker push-over-ssh`. EDIT: why I think it's important because on automations that are developed collaboratively, "pussh" could be seen as a typo by someone unfamiliar with the feature and cause unnecessary confusion, whereas "push-over-ssh" is clearly deliberate. Think of them maybe as short-hand/full flags. |
| |
| ▲ | psviderski 4 days ago | parent | next [-] | | That's a valid concern. You can very easily give it whatever name you like. Docker looks for `docker-COMAND` executables in ~/.docker/cli-plugins directory making COMMAND a `docker` subcommand. Rename the file to whatever you like, e.g. to get `docker pushoverssh`: mv ~/.docker/cli-plugins/docker-pussh ~/.docker/cli-plugins/docker-pushoverssh
Note that Docker doesn't allow dashes in plugin commands. | |
| ▲ | whalesalad 3 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | can easily see an engineer spotting pussh in a ci/cd workflow or something and thinking "this is a mistake" and changing it. |
|
|
| ▲ | EricRiese 4 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| > The extra 's' is for 'sssh' > What's that extra 's' for? > That's a typo |
| |
|
| ▲ | someothherguyy 4 days ago | parent | prev [-] |
| and prone to collision! |
| |
| ▲ | nine_k 4 days ago | parent [-] | | Indeed so! Because it's art, not engineering. The engineering approach would require a recognizably distinct command, eliminating the possibility of such a pun. | | |
| ▲ | rollcat 3 days ago | parent | next [-] | | I used to have an alias em=mg, because mg(1) is a small Emacs, so "em" seemed like a fun name for a command. Until one day I made that typo. | | | |
| ▲ | pinoy420 3 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | [dead] |
|
|