Align short option in commandgroup contenttype field

[Jwaegebaert]

Noticed that spo contenttype field set has a vague short option for contentTypeId. Usually, contentTypeId would be shortened to i, but here it's c. This is probably because the option id is also available, even though it doesn't have a short option.

I suggest we either remove the short c or change it to i. If we change it to i, we need to ensure it doesn't confuse users with the id option.

ToDo:

Changes to spo contenttype field remove:

• remove the short option for --contentTypeId
• change --fieldLinkId <fieldLinkId> to -i, --id <id>

Changes to spo contenttype field set:

• remove the short option for --contentTypeId
• add the short -i to --id

[milanholemans]

At the set command it's called id while at the remove command it's called fieldLinkId. Shouldn't we align these as well? I feel like it should be called id with short i.

[milanholemans]

Would also be a nice enhancement to specify a field by its internal name.

[Jwaegebaert]

fieldLinkId should indeed better become id. So then for both commands, we would go for -i, --id <id> as the ID of the field. Then for spo contenttype field remove we'll need to remove the short option for contentTypeId as well.

I think it would also be better that we don't add any short option to contentTypeId for clarity.

Would also be a nice enhancement to specify a field by its internal name.

Sounds like a good idea. The field's internal name is much more used than its ID. Maybe something we open up a separate issue for?

[milanholemans]

fieldLinkId should indeed better become id. So then for both commands, we would go for -i, --id <id> as the ID of the field. Then for spo contenttype field remove we'll need to remove the short option for contentTypeId as well.

I think it would also be better that we don't add any short option to contentTypeId for clarity.

Would also be a nice enhancement to specify a field by its internal name.

Sounds like a good idea. The field's internal name is much more used than its ID. Maybe something we open up a separate issue for?

I agree with everything 🙂

[Jwaegebaert]

The specs are updated