[jboss-as7-dev] rename jboss-cli.sh?

[Weiqi Gao]

JBoss has never been shy in breaking user's configuration files and 
script files (and the core of the underlying container technology and 
classloading architecture, etc.)  We are quite used to it.

The naming scheme of

   jboss-cli.bat
   jboss-cli.sh

goes against portability of skills across platforms and therefore 
against usability.  For it allows the Windows user to issue the command 
with a plain

   jboss-cli

while forces the Unix user to issue the command with

   jboss-cli.sh

At least drop the .sh suffix.  It won't hurt more than the class loader 
infrastructure changes that you guys throw at us every few years.

--
Weiqi Gao
weiqigao at speakeasy.net
http://www.weiqigao.com/blog/

On 09/04/2012 10:10 AM, Brian Stansberry wrote:
> Agreed. Changing the name of this script would require changes to docs,
> courseware, knowledge base articles, demos, etc.
>
> Plus, the name change from jboss-admin.sh came out of a big usability
> workshop we had with people from all over Red Hat. So changing it again
> would IMO require a big discussion.
>
> I launch the CLI via
>
> ./jb<tab><enter>
>
>   From the root, this is fine too:
>
> bin/jb<tab><enter>
>
> On 9/3/12 5:14 PM, Stuart Douglas wrote:
>> I don't think this is worth it. Any change like this at this point is
>> going to break users existing scripts, for no real benefit.
>>
>> I also don't really think that two tab completions are to many, and if
>> someone is using it enough that it is an annoyance they can just create
>> an alias anyway.
>>
>> Stuart
>>
>>> Cheng Fang <mailto:cfang at redhat.com>
>>> 1 September 2012 2:26 AM
>>> I've been playing with jboss as7 cli and like to share my experience. I
>>> understand that in AS7-2310, it was renamed from jboss-admin.sh to
>>> jboss-cli.sh, so a second renaming seems disruptive, but anyway here it
>>> goes...
>>>
>>> First, can we remove the .sh file extension? Tools like ant, mvn and
>>> groovy are all shell scripts but do not have the .sh extension. Users
>>> just need to execute it, without concerning if it is written as a shell
>>> script to binary. Having the .sh extension limits ourselves in impl
>>> options. On Windows we continue to have .bat, which is unavoidable, but
>>> users just need to run "jboss-cli" with .bat extension.
>>>
>>> jboss-cli.sh is quite some typing for users, and the first TAB
>>> completion will not enough. It takes 2 tabs to complete jboss-cli.sh
>>>
>>> Secondly, can we remove the -cli part to further simplify the name? It
>>> seems to be superfluous as many terminal commands are cli. IMO, a name
>>> needs to reflect the purpose of the tool, rather than its form. By
>>> having -cli in the name, we are again restricting it to be a cli tool.
>>> But didn't we have a GUI form that can be launched by 'jboss-cli.sh
>>> --gui'?
>>>
>>> I personally like the old name jboss-admin.sh better, except that it's
>>> too long.
>>>
>>> Cheng
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> jboss-as7-dev mailing list
>>> jboss-as7-dev at lists.jboss.org
>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-as7-dev
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> jboss-as7-dev mailing list
>> jboss-as7-dev at lists.jboss.org
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-as7-dev
>>
>
>