feat(rome_service): traverse upwards the fs to discover the config file

[ematipico]

Summary

This PR adds a way to discover rome.json by traversing the file system upwards.

Test Plan

I manually tested the feature using the CLI in our internal repository, and tested manually the VSCode extension.

Below a recording to demonstrate the feature:

Screen.Recording.2023-02-21.at.11.57.24.mov

Documentation

• The PR requires documentation
• I will create a new PR to update the documentation

[netlify]

✅ Deploy Preview for docs-rometools canceled.

Name	Link
🔨 Latest commit	e91314c
🔍 Latest deploy log	https://app.netlify.com/sites/docs-rometools/deploys/63f623f5e21d610007404858

[ematipico]

CI is failing on ubuntu... it seems the some code hits an infinite loop

[realtimetodie]

I like this idea and I think this is useful, nonetheless I would appreciate it if this could become an optional opt-in feature, for example with a flag --auto-search. Traversing upwards breaks sandboxing in Bazel. This is a problem. For example, a rome.json configuration file in a parent directory would create false positives.

[realtimetodie]

I think it would be helpful for users, if we could show a message when a rome.json configuration file was found using upwards-traversal (auto-search).

Alternatively, we could always show the path of the current rome.json configuration file (if any).

The from_parent variable is a bool primitive.

Suggested change

	let mut configuration_path = match base_path {
	let mut from_parent = false;
	let mut configuration_path = match base_path {

[ematipico]

I like this idea and I think this is useful, nonetheless I would appreciate it if this could become an optional opt-in feature, for example with a flag --auto-search. Traversing upwards breaks sandboxing in Bazel. This is a problem. For example, a rome.json configuration file in a parent directory would create false positives.

Are you open to having the feature opt-out, instead? I made the feature like this because it's used by the LSP too, and this is a feature requested by many users. And, as far as I understood, the prettier/eslint VSCode extensions do the same.

What do you think?

[realtimetodie]

Yes of course, opt-out is fine. In Bazel, the path to the rome.json configuration path is set explicitly using the new --config-path option.

[realtimetodie]

Maybe auto-traversal could be disabled, when the --config-path option is used (ConfigurationBasePath::FromUser(PathBuf)). Then we would not need a separate opt-out option?

[ematipico]

Maybe auto-traversal could be disabled, when the --config-path option is used (ConfigurationBasePath::FromUser(PathBuf)). Then we would not need a separate opt-out option?

That's a good suggestion! I like it!