[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
Re: [equinox-dev] Plans to replace the Console with GoGo for Indigo
|
If the plan is to replace the internal
console with a bundle-supplied console (e.g. GoGo; and I think this is
a fine plan), then I think the -console argument either needs to be deprecated
(and now would be a great time to put people on notice) or we need to plan
for the -console argument to eventually start the bundle-supplied console
once the internal console is gone.
--
From:
Jeff McAffer <jeff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To:
Equinox development
mailing list <equinox-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date:
2010/12/02 20:00
Subject:
Re: [equinox-dev]
Plans to replace the Console with GoGo for Indigo
Sent by:
equinox-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
IMHO the bar for Indigo is pretty low. We need to
make sure that Gogo can run properly on Equinox. All servicability
extension work can be focused on using Gogo. Having a way to disable the
current console would be interesting but not essential. Don't want
the console? don't put -console on the command line.
I'm reluctant to put any logic in the framework or launcher
to choose between consoles or search for console implementations or...
People shipping configurations where they want to use Gogo should
setup their config to have Gogo installed and started. We may choose
in the future to supply such a setup from Equinox and there can even be
a bundle that looks for a -gogo command line arg but that should not be
in the framework impl.
So, what do we actually have to do here?
Jeff
On 2010-12-02, at 1:44 PM, Thomas Watson wrote:
This is the kind of thing I want to address for 3.7 to
enable the use of bundles on top of the framework to provide the console.
Ideally this would involve a way to configure the framework so that the
-console option just did what you need to get your bundles started as well
as completely disabling the console support built into the framework. I
think that is part of the solution proposed in https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=169603
Tom
<graycol.gif>"Kirchev, Lazar"
---12/02/2010 10:52:30 AM---For the extraction of the console in a separate
bundle there is a bug opened: https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=169
<ecblank.gif>
From:
| <ecblank.gif>
"Kirchev, Lazar" <l.kirchev@xxxxxxx>
|
<ecblank.gif>
To:
| <ecblank.gif>
Equinox development mailing list <equinox-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
|
<ecblank.gif>
Date:
| <ecblank.gif>
12/02/2010 10:52 AM
|
<ecblank.gif>
Subject:
| <ecblank.gif>
Re: [equinox-dev] Plans to replace the Console with GoGo for Indigo |
For the extraction of the console in a separate bundle there is a bug opened:
https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=169603
and a patch is provided there.
One of the reasons for considering the moving of the console out of the
framework is that adding new features to the console while it is in the
framework will increase the size of the framework. The current built-in
console lacks telnet supportability features for example. Now if the console
stays in the framework, it will not include such features. But such supportability
features also improve usability. Probably we should provide them as an
optional bundle - anyone who needs them to install this bundle? What I
have prepared for the incubator is meant to run as a Gogo command, but
it easily may be changed to support both cases – as a Gogo command, and
the ConsoleSession interface available since 3.6.
Also, currently the only way to run Gogo on top of Equinox is to start
Equinox without the –console option, and make Gogo bundles initially started.
So it is not possible to pass –console and start either one, or the other.
Probably add an option to specify the console jar/jars, if a console different
from the built-in should be started?
Lazar
From: equinox-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:equinox-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Thomas Watson
Sent: Thursday, December 02, 2010 5:50 PM
To: Equinox development mailing list
Subject: Re: [equinox-dev] Plans to replace the Console with GoGo for
Indigo
We also must consider the amount
of work it would take to extract the console out and test it properly.
I am reluctant to do any of that work when we want to eventually replace
the console implementation with the gogo shell and a bundle that bridges
the old equinox command implementations to the new shell.
Tom
<graycol.gif>Jeff
McAffer ---12/02/2010 09:37:45 AM---The disadvantage is usability. Right
now you get equinox and run with -console and its all good. If we break
it out you'll ha
<34743407.jpg>
From:
| <34519726.jpg>
Jeff McAffer <jeff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
|
<34743407.jpg>
To:
| <34519726.jpg>
Equinox development mailing list <equinox-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
|
<34743407.jpg>
Date:
| <34519726.jpg>
12/02/2010 09:37 AM
|
<34743407.jpg>
Subject:
| <34519726.jpg>
Re: [equinox-dev] Plans to replace the Console with GoGo for Indigo |
The disadvantage is usability. Right now you get equinox and run with -console
and its all good. If we break it out you'll have to get two bundles and
make sure that the console bundle is started...
We have thought about shipping two setups, one with the console and one
without. That might work but we need to consider consumer confusion (which
one do I get, which one do I have, ...) and the work required to setup/maintain
the build.
Perhaps the new starter kit direction we've been exploring could offer
some help...
Anyway, there is a lot of pressure to improve ease of use so we need to
keep that in mind through these changes.
Jeff
On 2010-12-01, at 6:02 PM, Alex Blewitt wrote:
On 1 Dec 2010, at 22:06, Thomas
Watson wrote:
There have been various discussions
about replacing our framework console with something a bit more functional
and flexible like apache gogo [1]. At this point in the Indigo release
we do not plan to remove our own console for the Indigo release. Instead
we will do what ever is required to enable the use of gogo on top of Equinox.
We would like to use the incubator to allow this effort to mature and then
re-evaluate the complete removal of our built-in framework console in a
later release. Lazar Kirchev from SAP has been doing various experiments
and investigations in this area. My hope is that Lazar will soon be in
a position to contribute this work to the equinox incubator so that others
can try it out on top of Indigo.
Tom
[1] https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=317827
One other advantage would be in
slimming down Equinox by providing the console in a separate bundle from
the main OSGi runtime.
Alex
_______________________________________________
equinox-dev mailing list
equinox-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev
_______________________________________________
equinox-dev mailing list
equinox-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev
_______________________________________________
equinox-dev mailing list
equinox-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev
_______________________________________________
equinox-dev mailing list
equinox-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev
_______________________________________________
equinox-dev mailing list
equinox-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev