refinements to syntax (feedback requested) about napari-plugin-devtools

[neuromusic]

I worry -h for --hook is confusing with -h for --help, but I like --hook, so not quite sure what to do there.

yeah, same. perhaps npd validate -k/--hook?

[sofroniewn]

Overall I really like your syntax proposals @neuromusic.

I was expecting to be able to do something like npd validate-packages package_name. I think your proposal of npd validate --package. I could alternatively consider npd validate --include and npd validate --exclude, where npd validate would use all packages, --include would use just those listed in include (could be a list). --exclude would use all apart from those listed in exclude.

I worry -h for --hook is confusing with -h for --help, but I like --hook, so not quite sure what to do there. I think that allowing people to pass the name of the hook spec is much nicer than validate-functions etc, as it will grow with our hookspecs.

I'd also allow the --include and --hook functionality to be combined, so that you could look at just the one hook spec with a certain package (right now if i try and run a specific hookspec for a package i'm interested in, i just get loads of info from one of my other packages which has a bunch of stuff in it).

I think the test now that is done with valdiate-packages I might rename with --discover (or you could just keep this as --package, if we're now using --include), so you could do things like

npd validate --include napari-demo --discover # to just get discover for this package
npd validate --include napari-demo --hook= napari_experimental_provide_function # to just get this hook for this package
npd validate --include napari-demo # to get discover and all hooks for this package
npd validate --discover # to get discover and all packages

How does this sound? cc @LCObus with whom I just did some user testing!

[sofroniewn]

yeah, same. perhaps npd validate -k/--hook?

works for me!