If there is already a saved server config for myapp, and a user runs the run command for another server named myapp, chalet will correctly report the name conflict:
Configuration already exists with name 'fp2' (use -f to force creation)
However, it then proceeds to run the specified command anyway, and when that command exits, it proceeds to remove the config file for the previously saved myapp server — thereby removing the myapp server from chalet.
This result is very destructive and unexpected — especially since chalet is already detecting the name collision. A previously saved server should never be modified or removed by the run command unless the --force option is given.
Even worse, this can happen even if the run command does not specify a -n/--name option — because it will use the current directory name as the default server name and will proceed to remove any saved server matching that name.
Unless the --force option is given, then there currently is no clean way to run a server (specified or derived from cwd) with the same name as an existing server, since the run command currently works by writing to a temporary config file (and thus would overwrite the existing server's config file). Therefore, if such a name collision is detected, then the run command should display the name-collision error message (as shown above) and then exit immediately.
If there is already a saved server config for
myapp, and a user runs theruncommand for another server namedmyapp,chaletwill correctly report the name conflict:However, it then proceeds to run the specified command anyway, and when that command exits, it proceeds to remove the config file for the previously saved
myappserver — thereby removing themyappserver fromchalet.This result is very destructive and unexpected — especially since
chaletis already detecting the name collision. A previously saved server should never be modified or removed by theruncommand unless the--forceoption is given.Even worse, this can happen even if the
runcommand does not specify a-n/--nameoption — because it will use the current directory name as the default server name and will proceed to remove any saved server matching that name.Unless the
--forceoption is given, then there currently is no clean way to run a server (specified or derived fromcwd) with the same name as an existing server, since theruncommand currently works by writing to a temporary config file (and thus would overwrite the existing server's config file). Therefore, if such a name collision is detected, then theruncommand should display the name-collision error message (as shown above) and then exit immediately.