4 ms·
Yeah I'm more of a `--wet-run` `-w` fan myself. But it does depend on how serious/annoying the opposite is.
by xyse53 8mo ago
Yeah I'm more of a `--wet-run` `-w` fan myself. But it does depend on how serious/annoying the opposite is.
- aqme28 8mo agoI've done that, but I hate the term "wet run." I use "live run" now, which I think gets the point across without being sort of uncomfortable.
- IgorPartola 8mo ago--with-danger --make-it-so --do-the-thing --go-nuts --safety-off So many fun options.
- Darfk 8mo agoI'm a fan of --safety-off. It gives off a 'aim away from face' or 'mishandle me and I'll blow a chunk out of your DB' vibe.
- JsonCameron 8mo agoI've done a few --execute --i-know-what-im-doing for some more dangerous scripts
- altairprime 8mo agoMay I recommend --I-take-responsibility-for-the-outcome-of-proceeding and require a capital I?
- altairprime 8mo ago--commit is solid too
- torstenvl 8mo agoIt's in the UI not the command line, but I like Chromium's thisisunsafe
- tetha 8mo agoI find it important to include system information in here as well, so just copy-pasting an invocation from system A to system B does not run. For example, our database restore script has a parameter `--yes-delete-all-data-in` and it needs to be parametrized with the PostgreSQL cluster name. So a command with `--yes-delete-all-data-in=pg-accounting` works on exactly one system and not on other systems.
- Quekid5 8mo agoMoist run is the way.
- bregma 8mo ago--moisten