acme-tiny VS bash-modules

Going to throw another hat into the ring here: I use acme-tiny [1], which is a single file ACME client written in Python in under 200 lines. The idea behind it is that you can fully read and understand everything it does without spending too much time on it. I really like this approach, so I went ahead and started using it, and have been for a few years now.

[1] https://github.com/diafygi/acme-tiny

Let’s Encrypt with ACME-Tiny

Recommendation from me as well. Have been using this script for multiple years now without a single issue. The minimal code is awesome for avoiding unnecessary external dependencies and complexity.

Be sure to use the latest version from https://github.com/diafygi/acme-tiny though :-)

Bash is turing-complete, so it's possible to write automated test cases in bash. Example: https://github.com/vlisivka/bash-modules/blob/master/bash-mo...

Template in article is awful. It's better to use this one, which is a real CLI tool: https://github.com/vlisivka/bash-modules/blob/master/bash-mo...

IMHO, you are mixing TODO lists and task management/planning software. No, I don't know a good task manager or business process manager for command line. Instead, I created a simpler TODO list manager, called `td`[0], which supports flat TODO lists only, and use directories and command-line generators to manage todo's. `td` prints top item only, by default, leaving little room for procrastination. I'm keeping one `TODO.md` file per project instead of one large TODO file for all todo's.

[0]: https://github.com/vlisivka/bash-modules/blob/master/bash-mo...

Documentation: http://vlisivka.github.io/bash-modules/ Project home page: https://github.com/vlisivka/bash-modules

I'm preparing to release bash-modules 4.0 [0]. Can you give me feedback, please? I'm a non-native English speaker, so I need someone to help fix spelling mistakes, at least.

https://github.com/vlisivka/bash-modules

It works in my shell. :-/ It looks like you forgot to insert `false` command.

You are pointing to the problem with -e not working in subshell/deep functions, because of POSIX. Right? It's described in bash documentation: http://www.gnu.org/software/bash/manual/html_node/The-Set-Bu...

> I think just defining a die() function and using it after any command that must succeed is more verbose, but less error prone:

Yep. It's the style I developed 12 years ago, when working at Bazaarvoice, when I was lead of devops team. I created the whole library for bash, to use this pattern consistently. See https://github.com/vlisivka/bash-modules#error-handling