Repository navigation
Add label clone command #5441
Description
Activity
- addedenhancementa request to improve CLIa request to improve CLIhelp wantedContributions welcomeContributions welcome
on Apr 11, 2022 Per discussion on #446,
--forcewould also be acceptable. IMO, more consistent with other CLIs, but either - with a good description - works.Reacted by Sam CoeI've started working on this.
Reacted by Sam Coe- added a commit that references this issue
on Apr 13, 2022 I was recently asked if it was possible to copy only a subset of labels from a repo to an another 🤔 What do you think about this idea ? Should we make a Feature request ❔
Reacted by Daniel Santos and Yukai ChouI think for this I'd rather port what I mentioned in my comment:
importandexportcommands. You can export to a TSV or CSV, edit in Excel or whatever, then import into another repo - or the same repo just to update labels more easily. Thoughts?Reacted by SALES and Yukai Chou@heaths 👍
@heathsThanks for the explanation. Seems like going with a singlelabel clonecommand would be sufficient to start. I agree that it should support some sort of--overwriteflag that will do the upsert operation, but I would be hesitant to have that be the default behavior and would rather see the user have to opt in to a potentially destructive operation.Originally posted by @samcoe in #446 (comment)
Reacted by SALES😸 @Imtiyaz40 :
@heaths Thanks for the explanation. Seems like going with a single label clone command would be sufficient to start.
That would be perfecttly 🆗 ❣️
I agree that it should support some sort of --overwrite flag that will do the upsert operation, but I would be hesitant to have that be the default behavior and would rather see the user have to opt in to a potentially destructive operation.
Defintitely agree 👍
@heathsThanks for the explanation. Seems like going with a singlelabel clonecommand would be sufficient to start. I agree that it should support some sort of--overwriteflag that will do the upsert operation, but I would be hesitant to have that be the default behavior and would rather see the user have to opt in to a potentially destructive operation.Originally posted by @samcoe in #446 (comment)