[ Feature ] Add proxy support for the generate from template command

[AayushSaini101]

Why do we need this improvement?

We have already introduced proxy support in multiple commands of cli, reference: #1608 Need to add support in generate command as well.

How will this change help?

we can use the generate command behind the proxy as well.

Screenshots

No response

How could it be implemented/designed?

Reference:https://www.zenrows.com/blog/node-fetch-proxy#how-to-use-proxy-with-node-fetch of the implementation flow of the proxy

🚧 Breaking changes

No

👀 Have you checked for similar open issues?

• I checked and didn't find a similar issue

🏢 Have you read the Contributing Guidelines?

• I have read the Contributing Guidelines

Are you willing to work on this issue?

No, someone else can work on it.

[IITI-tushar]

@AayushSaini101 I want to work on it... Please assign me.

[AayushSaini101]

@AayushSaini101 I want to work on it... Please assign me.

@IITI-tushar sure

[IITI-tushar]

Thanks, I will open a PR soon.

[cs7-shrey]

can I too work on this? @AayushSaini101

[IITI-tushar]

@AayushSaini101 in commands/generate folder should i have to add proxy support to all three fromTemplate.ts , index.ts and models.ts files ???

[AayushSaini101]

@AayushSaini101 in commands/generate folder should i have to add proxy support to all three fromTemplate.ts , index.ts and models.ts files ???
yes, understand the flow whenever they are seeking to URL particular URL, you need to configure proxy support

[AayushSaini101]

can I too work on this? @AayushSaini101

@IITI-tushar already working on this issue : )

[neoandmatrix]

@AayushSaini101 looks like the pr has been inactive for quite some time. Can i continue with this issue.

Thanks.

[AayushSaini101]

@AayushSaini101 looks like the pr has been inactive for quite some time. Can i continue with this issue.

Thanks.

sure please thanks @neoandmatrix

[neoandmatrix]

@AayushSaini101 looks like the pr has been inactive for quite some time. Can i continue with this issue.

Thanks.

sure please thanks @neoandmatrix

Thanks on it now.

[neoandmatrix]

@AayushSaini101 while implementing this feature for the generate command i was going through the already implemented proxy support for asyncapi validate [SPEC-FILE] [PROXYHOST] [PROXYPORT] command but found some issues.

proxyPort and proxyHost can be passed from both arguments to command and from flags but is being read only from flags as implemented in code below

This can be also confirmed from running the command.

both command should output similar error but using flag gives correct error Proxy Connection Error: Unable to establish a connection to the proxy check hostName or PortNumber where as using as arguments give different error as FetchError: request to http://localhost:8080/dummySpec.yml failed, reason: connect ECONNREFUSED ::1:8080.

I guess the implementation should only be for flags as it makes more sense because passing with flags is a more cleaner implementation in my opinion.

I also might be mis understanding the implementation of this feature if that is the case please correct, will be very helpful.

So i wanted to ask that for this command should i go with arguments or flags method.

Please clarify so that i can proceed with implementation of this feature.

Thanks.

[AayushSaini101]

@AayushSaini101 while implementing this feature for the generate command i was going through the already implemented proxy support for asyncapi validate [SPEC-FILE] [PROXYHOST] [PROXYPORT] command but found some issues.

proxyPort and proxyHost can be passed from both arguments to command and from flags but is being read only from flags as implemented in code below

This can be also confirmed from running the command.

both command should output similar error but using flag gives correct error Proxy Connection Error: Unable to establish a connection to the proxy check hostName or PortNumber where as using as arguments give different error as FetchError: request to http://localhost:8080/dummySpec.yml failed, reason: connect ECONNREFUSED ::1:8080.

I guess the implementation should only be for flags as it makes more sense because passing with flags is a more cleaner implementation in my opinion.

I also might be mis understanding the implementation of this feature if that is the case please correct, will be very helpful.

So i wanted to ask that for this command should i go with arguments or flags method.

Please clarify so that i can proceed with implementation of this feature.

Thanks.

@neoandmatrix yes we are using flags in the existing commands

[neoandmatrix]

@AayushSaini101 should i also make the changes for existing commands and remove the proxyHost and proxyPort form arguments as it can be misleading to users by opening a new issue for this and making a PR there?

Thanks.