If a Drush command returns a string value, then print it

[greg-1-anderson]

... even if the command does not define an outputformat record in its command definition.

Previously, a command needed to define an outputformat record in order to get the string to print. e.g.:

'outputformat' => array(
  'default' => 'string',
),

With this patch, this definition may be omitted; however, omitting the outputformat record is not quite the same as including a simple 'string' definition, as shown above. If the outputformat record is included, then the help text for the command will include the option for --format, and it will be possible to format using universal formatters such as var-export and json. Without the outputformat record, the --format option will not appear in the help text, and --format cannot be used with the command.

For simple commands that output only strings, it is probably most appropriate to omit the outputformat record, to keep the command help definition simple.

[weitzman]

Agreed. Please edit existing commands so they only return their string then feel free to commit to master and 6.x

[greg-1-anderson]

I could not find any commands that needed to be changed for this. Committed to master and Drush 6 branch.

[greg-1-anderson]

Github was confused, because I merged the commit from my branch in my drush repo into drush-ops, rather than checking out the branch that the pull request created in drush-ops. I guess it would have been faster to click the button, and then pull drush-ops. That's odd, though, because that is a commit-then-confirm workflow. I guess I don't know what the merge button does yet; will have to test it next time.