Skip to content

feat: Add interactive mode for improved user experience #293

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Open
wants to merge 3 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

ItamarShalev
Copy link
Contributor

Implement interactive mode in the tldr client, allowing users to browse
and select commands from a list of available pages. Access this mode
using the --interactive or -i flag. This enhancement improves
usability and streamlines command discovery.

Issue: #289

Itamar Shalev added 3 commits June 30, 2025 16:31
Add support for the TLDR_PLATFORM environment variable to let users
specify the desired platform (e.g., "linux", "macos", "windows") for
fetching TLDR pages.
This overrides the default platform detection.
The --platform option remains supported for per-command overrides.

Signed-off-by: Itamar Shalev <itamar1111111@gmai.com>
Signed-off-by: Itamar Shalev <itamar1111111@gmai.com>
Implement interactive mode in the tldr client, allowing users to browse
and select commands from a list of available pages. Access this mode
using the `--interactive` or `-i` flag. This enhancement improves
usability and streamlines command discovery.

Signed-off-by: Itamar Shalev <itamar1111111@gmai.com>
Comment on lines +102 to +112
- `linux`
- `windows`
- `win32`
- `android`
- `darwin`
- `freebsd`
- `macos`
- `netbsd`
- `openbsd`
- `osx`
- `sunos`
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Does win32 symlink, same for darwin and macos

@CleanMachine1
Copy link
Member

I personally think this idea is beyond the scope the client, especially since there is no spec for it.

@ItamarShalev
Copy link
Contributor Author

I personally think this idea is beyond the scope the client, especially since there is no spec for it.

Please let me know if you would like to discontinue this idea.
If so, I will stop working on it and address any outstanding linter issues.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants