[forge-dev] Forge CRAsH, CRAsH Forge!

Wed May 2 12:44:13 EDT 2012

Awesome !!! Let´s create a JIRA for it and make it happen ! :D
That could be the answer to some nasty bugs on JLine.

Looking forward to it !

Regards,

George

2012/5/2 Lincoln Baxter <lbaxter at redhat.com>:
> Awesome, Julien!
>
> Sorry for the delay on my end. I am at a conference and have limited access to the RedHat mail VPN.
>
> Could we bring this discussion to the dev list? (Copied)
>
> This way everyone will be able to discuss/follow. And I'll see it faster since it comes to all of my accounts.
> Thanks!
>
> ~Lincoln
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Julien Viet" <julien at julienviet.com>
> To: "Lincoln Baxter, III" <lbaxter at redhat.com>
> Cc: "Max Rydahl Andersen" <max.andersen at redhat.com>
> Sent: Friday, April 27, 2012 1:32:42 AM
> Subject: Re: Forge CRAsH, CRAsH Forge!
>
> I'm trying to POC something with crash as invoker of forge.
>
> I can now clearly see how it would work:
> - the jline code would be merged somehow with jline crash code: I need to see what can be reused or not
> - the invoking part would use crash that would give the benefit to use the other protocol out of the box like SSH
> - crash would be used like a IO library mostly that wraps the various implementations (jline,ssh,telnet)
>
> It will take me some time because I cannot spend much time on it (and I'm in vacation until wednesday :-) ).
>
> That being said I learned interesting stuff looking at forge code, like the nasty but useful proprietary SigHandler usage that is useful
> to catch control-c and use it to interrupt a process.
>
> This way the "shell" implementation (i.e was the shell do when you use it) would remain separate I think because CRaSH uses a file based approach (using lot of groovy)
> and forge uses a plugin based approach with CDI based on plugin deployment. We can still see more convergence later: in particular the command line parser, both seems very contextual and are pain to write / maintain :-)
>
> I'll let you know when I'll have available, it may take a couple of weeks depending on the work load aside (probably less). It will surely fork forge on GH
> to push the work visible at some point, I'll also post on the forge dev list too at this moment.
>
> Julien
>
>
>
>
> On Apr 26, 2012, at 8:18 PM, Lincoln Baxter, III wrote:
>
>> Plugins can change core behavior, so certainly.
>>
>> On Thu 26 Apr 2012 01:43:33 PM EDT, Julien Viet wrote:
>>> if the connectivity part of forge is also a plugin of forge, then it would certainly work.
>>>
>>> On Apr 26, 2012, at 7:26 PM, Lincoln Baxter, III wrote:
>>>
>>>> That's certainly something we could do as well! I like that idea :) It would certainly be easier if CRaSh were used as the Forge shell provider.
>>>>
>>>> On 04/26/2012 12:55 PM, Max Rydahl Andersen wrote:
>>>>> I was thinking that the functionallity in CRAsH to connect remotely could be loaded in as a plugin to Forge.
>>>>>
>>>>> That would be more an addon and not involve complex dependencies/legal rearrangements ?
>>>>>
>>>>> /max
>>>>>
>>>>> On Apr 26, 2012, at 15:46 , Lincoln Baxter, III wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hey Julien!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> CRaSH seems like a very well implemented and creative project! At first I didn't really understand what it was for, but the thought of providing SSH access directly to runtime Java applications is, simply put, brilliant!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Forge is a bit heavy for that at the moment, because of our dependency on CDI (primarily,) and because we haven't yet disassociated the built-in plugins from the core distribution. Soon, however, our shell will be entirely standalone. With zero or as much functionality as you want OOB.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I noticed we both use JLine, although mike's Forked it quite a bit for our needs. (Wish he would have done it as an actual fork, not as a source bundle in the project itself, but perhaps there's some collaboration opportunity there.)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Where do you think we can work together? I'm totally open to ideas.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ~Lincoln
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed 25 Apr 2012 04:18:06 PM EDT, Julien Viet wrote:
>>>>>>> hey :-)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I would welcome a collaboration, a single effort would provide more features, increase the community footprint and visibility of both projects.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I have been working hard recently to finish the 1.0 of CRaSH and provide the best user experience I could offer at the moment.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Currently CRaSH is used in several products / projects already!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> - eXo Cloud IDE provides a web interface using CRaSH under the hood (see photo here https://twitter.com/#!/chanezon/status/194759689102303233/photo/1/large )
>>>>>>> - EPP embeds it for portal management providing CLI : https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/R8ruzrxNQ6IWyh-vKGgrnbzpZJJiUYMwZ5RePzRoQQH_YeRLhGeQG6olps5RgcyiZ162NIZTIWw6Quegmr33nPqU18FQteGmmv7ZCHDl8J9VQEXeKpk
>>>>>>> - the Silverpeas portal embeds it : http://www.silverpeas.org/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> let me know if you would like to work with me :-)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Apr 25, 2012, at 2:43 PM, Max Rydahl Andersen wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi guys,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Just wanted to e-introduce you guys after talking to you both about the nice possible overlaps/interactions
>>>>>>>> being able to have the features CRaSH provides from within Forge (i.e. connection and interaction with remote process).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Julien, meet Lincoln the Forge Master;
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Lincoln, meet Julien the Party Crasher.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> /max
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>> Lincoln Baxter, III
>>>>>> http://ocpsoft.org
>>>>>> "Simpler is better."
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> ---
>>>> Lincoln Baxter, III
>>>> http://ocpsoft.org
>>>> "Simpler is better."
>>>>
>>>
>>
>> --
>> ---
>> Lincoln Baxter, III
>> http://ocpsoft.org
>> "Simpler is better."
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> forge-dev mailing list
> forge-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/forge-dev