Simplified subcommand term

[shadowspawn]

Pull Request

Problem

The subcommand usage being slightly different than the command usage has always annoyed me a little. It may be a historical accident rather than by design.

In particular people who write a custom usage are surprised it does not show (#1853 #1885 #2148). But I am concerned about potential length of showing full usage by default: #1853 (comment)

Subcommand list was not showing [command] for subcommands with nested subcommands. (Missed when added nested subcommands.)

Solution

Show just the arguments (or [command] for nested subcommands). No alias. No '[options].

This makes the subcommand term clearly different that the usage, and the terms a bit shorter.

Tests skipped while thinking about approach! See first comment, as taking it further could show just the name!

ChangeLog

[shadowspawn]

An alternative would be to show only the subcommand name for the term in the list of subcommands. This is what larger programs do, such as git, npm, docker, and hg.

To make sure people find there is more help available, the help command would be listed separately. For example git has:

See 'git help <command>' or 'git help <concept>' to read about a specific subcommand or concept.

[shadowspawn]

I opened a PR as I wanted to try changing the subcommand term and had an idea. Then I wondered about other approaches... I should make this an issue with alternatives instead!