feat: warp init simplified config

[xeno097]

Description

This PR updates the ISM configuration prompting for the warp init command allowing the user to choose if a trusted ISM should be used by default or a configured one.

Before:

After:

Drive-by changes

• No

Related issues

• Fixes feat(cli): Allow user to decide to deploy a trusted relayer ISM #4464

Backward compatibility

• Yes

Testing

• Manual

[changeset-bot]

🦋 Changeset detected

Latest commit: 96ca5ea

The changes in this PR will be included in the next version bump.

This PR includes changesets to release 9 packages

Name	Type
@hyperlane-xyz/cli	Minor
@hyperlane-xyz/ccip-server	Minor
@hyperlane-xyz/github-proxy	Minor
@hyperlane-xyz/helloworld	Minor
@hyperlane-xyz/infra	Minor
@hyperlane-xyz/sdk	Minor
@hyperlane-xyz/utils	Minor
@hyperlane-xyz/widgets	Minor
@hyperlane-xyz/core	Patch

Not sure what this means? Click here to learn what changesets are.

Click here if you're a maintainer who wants to add another changeset to this PR

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 73.85%. Comparing base (c08d842) to head (96ca5ea).
Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #4504   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   73.85%   73.85%           
=======================================
  Files         100      100           
  Lines        1423     1423           
  Branches      181      181           
=======================================
  Hits         1051     1051           
  Misses        351      351           
  Partials       21       21           

Components	Coverage Δ
core	84.61% <ø> (ø)
hooks	75.71% <ø> (ø)
isms	78.94% <ø> (ø)
token	88.23% <ø> (ø)
middlewares	77.39% <ø> (ø)

[ltyu]

Good progress.
There is some conflicting (and confusing) flags that should not work together, in this case it is --advanced and --yes. One thing that can help is to force --advanced and --yes to be mutually exclusive by using conflicts

Here's where you can use it:

[xeno097]

Good progress. There is some conflicting (and confusing) flags that should not work together, in this case it is --advanced and --yes. One thing that can help is to force --advanced and --yes to be mutually exclusive by using conflicts

Here's where you can use it:

Hey @ltyu before pushing the pr I tried the conflicts option but it fails even if the user does not provide it because we have default values for it, I implemented a manual check but changed it after a comment from @yorhodes here -> #4504 (comment). I can re-add the manual check if we want to

[ltyu]

Good progress. There is some conflicting (and confusing) flags that should not work together, in this case it is --advanced and --yes. One thing that can help is to force --advanced and --yes to be mutually exclusive by using conflicts
Here's where you can use it:

Hey @ltyu before pushing the pr I tried the conflicts option but it fails even if the user does not provide it because we have default values for it, I implemented a manual check but changed it after a comment from @yorhodes here -> #4504 (comment). I can re-add the manual check if we want to

ah make sense. i'm okay with it being biased to one of them.

[ltyu]

LGTM!