Add support for project-wise config files and default tunnels about ngrok HOT 5 CLOSED

I think these are all reasonable. I'm not sure how to deal with the auth token thing without overcomplicating the configuration file loading. Maybe it could fallback to using an environment variable?

Programmatic access to the randomly-assigned domain and wildcard domains are also popular requests I've received.

Unless you object, I'm going to split this issue out into separate issues for each concern.

from ngrok.

@inconshreveable Well using a simple alias one can fix the auth_token issue when using custom config files. And of course I don't object. Whatever is the easiest!

I just hope the way I like to use ngrok makes sense, as using a simple command as "ngrok" in a project's root directory to allow previewing it to other dev's or perhaps even directly to users (to figure out where they get stuck) seems as a very powerful tool to me.

(When I get emails from users that something doesn't work I had to branch, commit, push, pull, checkout, mail, wait. Now I can branch, ngrok, mail, and see where it might go wrong and do changes on the fly before having to commit the changes. But that might be unique to the project's nature though.)

from ngrok.

There's no right or wrong way to use ngrok. It makes sense what you're trying to do and seems totally reasonable to me. The only question that needs to be answered is whether it makes sense to solve this problem in ngrok's space or whether it should be pushed to the developers if there isn't a good general solution. I'll keep thinking on this.

from ngrok.

+1

fwiw this would help projects that use ngrok to passively share the fact that they use it -- casual inspection of the root dir would raise that point :)

from ngrok.

ngrok 2.x supports this by allowing you to specify multiple configuration files so that you can have project-level configs and global configs.

won't fix for 1.x

from ngrok.