Add the option to handle depth for the tree flag

[geektimus]

Introduction

Hi, I really like this gem, I was customising terminal and then, one day, I found myself running this in one of my personal projects with a lot of folders and I was surprised that nobody already fixed this so I wanted to improve in this part of the gem.

I'm not a full time ruby dev but I like to learn, Im open for suggestions and ideas 😃

Description

This pull request includes:

• Changes required to handle depth while using the tree flag
• Update the README to show the usage of the new option for tree
• Update the README to remove the usage of "-t" as a short version of "--tree" since that definition is wrong. "--tree" is to show the directory tree and "-t" is to sort by modification time.

There's some work to be done to consider this as finished since I made one assumption that I want to clarify.

I need to check the other options/flags on the README to avoid cases as with "-t"

• Relevant Issues : tree depth #168
• Relevant PRs : None
• Type of change :
  • New feature
  • Bug fix for existing feature
  • Code quality improvement
  • Addition or Improvement of tests
  • Addition or Improvement of documentation

Note: Don't mind the missing icons on the gif. I'm learning how to use/customize that tool too 😅

[codecov-io]

Codecov Report

Merging #253 into master will increase coverage by 0.14%.
The diff coverage is 100%.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master     #253      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   84.37%   84.52%   +0.14%     
==========================================
  Files           7        7              
  Lines         416      420       +4     
==========================================
+ Hits          351      355       +4     
  Misses         65       65

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
lib/colorls/flags.rb	83.17% <100%> (+0.32%)	⬆️
lib/colorls/core.rb	88.78% <100%> (+0.1%)	⬆️

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 3897c6c...545630e. Read the comment docs.

[geektimus]

Should I create a function for the new behaviour?
if the depth is not provided just use the old function and if the value is passed use the new one?

About the increment of the variable on the loop
tree_traverse("#{path}/#{content}", prespace + indent, depth, indent) unless depth > @tree[:depth] it was done there so I can use it for the function call and the unless condition.

I already re-write that part

[avdv]

Should I create a function for the new behaviour?
if the depth is not provided just use the old function and if the value is passed use the new one?

No, let's not duplicate the code. Just use nil as default value for the depth option and handle it in the condition.

Also, could you add a test case in flags_spec.rb please?

And add an example call to the travis.yml file.

[avdv]

Nice work, the PR is almost ready to merge. Could you fix the two minor issues, please?

[avdv]

Thank you for your first contribution! 🎉