fix(create-waku): fix cli and swap to clack + pico

[tylersayshi]

prompts => @clack/prompts
kolorist => picocolors

these libraries are copying the pattern set by create-vite

fixes #1289

[vercel]

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎

1 Skipped Deployment

Name	Status	Preview	Updated (UTC)
waku	⬜️ Ignored (Inspect)	Visit Preview	Mar 8, 2025 4:44am

[codesandbox-ci]

This pull request is automatically built and testable in CodeSandbox.

To see build info of the built libraries, click here or the icon next to each commit SHA.

[tylersayshi]

draft to fix e2e test setup

[tylersayshi]

@dai-shi would you be ok with testing the cli with execa & vitest like is done with create-vite

https://github.com/vitejs/vite/blob/main/packages/create-vite/__tests__/cli.spec.ts

I am having issues handling the stdin and stdout with clack and vite's test seems like a clean way to solve for this part.

Note: It does not test the interactive mode, but maybe we're ok with just an args based test too now that rob added the args support?

[dai-shi]

would you be ok with testing the cli with execa & vitest

I'm not very familiar but sounds ok. Any drawbacks?

It does not test the interactive mode, but maybe we're ok

I think we should eventually test the interactive mode, but for now better than nothing.

[tylersayshi]

I'm not very familiar but sounds ok. Any drawbacks?

the drawback with unit testing that I thought initially was that it would just not test interactive mode.

to test interactive mode though, we should mimic the @clack/prompts tests. They mock writable and readable to run the tests through vitest.

https://github.com/bombshell-dev/clack/blob/main/packages/core/test/prompts/prompt.test.ts

So I think two tests would be good

1. test create-waku with args
2. test create-waku in interactive mode by mocking writable and readable.

Do you think both are needed for this PR or would a follow up be on for one of them?

[dai-shi]

Do you think both are needed for this PR or would a follow up be on for one of them?

I'll leave it to you. Our requirement is not break the current behavior. (btw, I'm planning another patch release, so let me know if you go with separate PRs.)

[tylersayshi]

I'll plan for just this one PR and both tests mentioned above added. I want to be as careful as I can to not cause regression with this.

It will need to be tomorrow though. I'm out for trivia tonight. ✌️

[tylersayshi]

planning to wait for when we drop node 18 to mark this ready