Are there no cases at the moment where a script might want to run a command and not accept the defaults, e.g. for setting up links during deploy?

Are there no cases at the moment where a script might want to run a command and not accept the defaults, e.g. for setting up links during deploy?

@itowlson for do you mean to enable them to specify what database to link to? Would you expect something like --link label1:db1 --link label2:db2? I went with a fairly narrow scope here thinking this is a place to start to unblock removing interactivity, but if this choice makes future flexibility harder, we can definitely discuss some creative options here

For confirmation, you mentioned that we already have --yes on database deletion. Perhaps that should be our general option for non-interactive confirmations? In this case for the "change existing link" situation. (If I read it right, the default for "change existing link" is "no", so this is not accepting the defaults.)

Although now I am imagining the case where someone wants to link a label but only if that label isn't already linked. So they'd want a --no flag. Yuck. I am not sure how to tackle this.

@kate-goldenring Yeah that is the sort of conundrum I am wondering about - link to existing DBs vs create new, that kind of thing. I don't think the CI scenarios are so pressing that we need to "unblock" them (although I will probably turn out to be laughably wrong when half our E2E tests complain about it) - maybe we should take a bit more time on this? Sorry

closing for #151