mint does not fail when Mintfile does not exists at the specified path

[Skoti]

This check is hiding the error when the Mintfile does not exists:

Mint/Sources/MintKit/Mint.swift

Lines 124 to 126 in fdff1b5

	if mintFilePath.exists,
	let mintfile = try? Mintfile(path: mintFilePath),
	let mintFilePackage = mintfile.package(for: package.repo) {

Causing commands like:
mint run --no-install -m incorrect/path packageNameToRun
to fail because the newest version of the package was not found.
The bootstrap was done earlier with the correct Mintfile path.

Or commands like:
mint run -m incorrect/path packageNameToRun
to install the undesired newest version of the specified package and run with it ❗

Seems like the fix is not as easy as:

        let mintfile = try Mintfile(path: mintFilePath)
        if let mintFilePackage = mintfile.package(for: package.repo) {

because then 6 tests fail, I guess in some contexts it is expecting to run without Mintfile, but I don't know the internal assumptions of this project.

Anyway, surely when you specify Mintfile explicitly via -m option then it must fail if that file does not exist.
Regardless of whether it is the default path specified -m Mintfile or a custom one.

In the current state, it leads to confusion and hard-to-understand behaviours.

[r-dent]

Anyway, surely when you specify Mintfile explicitly via -m option then it must fail if that file does not exist.

+1 on that. AFAIK tools like Bundler or CocoaPods have the same behavior.

[yonaskolb]

Yes agree if the Mintfile is explicit then it should fail if not found.
In other cases Mint was designed to run packages without a Mintfile at all (that functionality came before the Mintfile even existed). I can understand if that seems like odd behaviour in certain cases.

[Noobish1]

Would love this change, we run into this more than we would like.