Allow http commands' automatic redirect-following to be disabled

[cyradotpink]

Intends to close #8920

This PR suggests a new flag for the http commands, --redirect-mode, which enables users to choose between different redirect handling modes. The current behaviour of letting ureq silently follow redirects remains the default, but two new options are introduced here, following the lead of JavaScript's fetch API: "manual", where any 3xx response to a request is simply returned as the command's result, and "error", where any 3xx response causes a network error like those caused by 4xx and 5xx responses.

This PR is a draft. Tests have not been added or run, the flag is currently only implemented for the http get command, and design tweaks are likely to be appropriate.

Most notably, it's not obvious to me whether a single flag which can take one of three values is the nicest solution here.
We might instead consider two binary flags (like --no-following-redirects and --disallow-redirects, although I'm bad at naming things so I need help with that anyway), or completely drop the "error" option if it's not deemed useful enough. (I personally think it has some merit, especially since 4xx and 5xx responses are already treated as errors by default; So this would allow users to treat only immediate 2xx responses as success)

User-facing changes

New options for the http [method] commands. Behaviour remains unchanged when the command line flag introduced here is not used.

[WindSoilder]

Thanks for your pr!

Actually I think it's good to have one --redirect-mode flag rather than having --no-following-redirects, --disallow-redirects flags. One reason is that it's hard to naming things, the other reason is we already have many flags on http relative commands.

[cyradotpink]

That's a good point. Actually, on that note, as far as I can tell all the http commands' existing flags have shorthands, which makes it difficult to find an appropriate one for this new flag that is still free. Anyone have any thoughts on that? Like, whether we even want a shorthand for this flag?

And in general, any additional feedback on design and the names I chose would be appreciated before I get this PR ready for review :)

[WindSoilder]

Sadly to found that -r and -p are used commonly, and they are in good places.

I have 2 ideas:

1. uppercase -R, represent redirect.
2. uppercase -P, and changes from --redirect-mode to --redirect-policy.

Personally I'd prefer the 1st option.

[WindSoilder]

Really thanks for your improvement on http commands, I think we can change something to make it better.

And, It's appreciated to have some tests for the feature. You can check here for more about testing code: https://github.com/nushell/nushell/tree/534287ed65630003d731bb8e0268a6e2f7f10bd2/crates/nu-command/tests/commands/network/http

[cyradotpink]

And, It's appreciated to have some tests for the feature. You can check here for more about testing code:

Thanks for this note - I was hoping you'd say something about tests, because I couldn't figure how tests should be done here on my own. I'll add some :)

[WindSoilder]

Thanks! Would you please resolve conflict?

[WindSoilder]

Thank you for working through all of this! Look good to me

[cyradotpink]

Thank you for the ideas and the reviews :))