Thomas Watson | 1 Dec 23:06 2010
Picon

Plans to replace the Console with GoGo for Indigo

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

<div>
<p>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.<br><br>
Tom<br><br>
[1] <a href="https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=317827">https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=317827</a><br></p>
</div>
Alex Blewitt | 2 Dec 00:02 2010
Picon

Re: Plans to replace the Console with GoGo for Indigo

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
<div>
<div>
<div>On 1 Dec 2010, at 22:06, Thomas Watson wrote:</div>
<br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite"><div><p>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.<br><br>
Tom<br><br>
[1] <a href="https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=317827">https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=317827</a></p></div></blockquote>One other advantage would be in slimming down Equinox by providing the console in a separate bundle from the main OSGi runtime.</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>Alex</div>
</div>
Jeff McAffer | 2 Dec 15:11 2010

Re: shell refactoring proposal - Indigo plan deadline

I'm not sure how to deal with the gogo jars in orbit. The jars are real bundles and we will not have to repackage them or anything like that. Jeff what do you recommend?

Orbit is about maintaining bundles for third party code that eclipse projects use. We already have cases where the code is delivered to us as a bundle (ICU, SSH, ...) so this would be just another instance of this.

As for timing, we have to wait for the IP team to approve the CQ but it should be reasonably quick.

I do not plan to move the console out of the framework. We can provide any changes you need to be able to disable it completely in your environment. I think there are options to do this already.

I guess the trick is if we expect someone running eclipse -console to get the built in one in one case and Gogo in another. What are we expecting the user model to be?

Jeff

<div>
<div>
<blockquote type="cite"><div><p>I'm not sure how to deal with the gogo jars in orbit.  The jars are real bundles and we will not have to repackage them or anything like that.  Jeff what do you recommend?<br></p></div></blockquote>
<div>Orbit is about maintaining bundles for third party code that eclipse projects use. We already have cases where the code is delivered to us as a bundle (ICU, SSH, ...) so this would be just another instance of this.</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>As for timing, we have to wait for the IP team to approve the CQ but it should be reasonably quick.</div>
<blockquote type="cite"><div><p>

I do not plan to move the console out of the framework.  We can provide any changes you need to be able to disable it completely in your environment.  I think there are options to do this already.<br></p></div></blockquote>
<div>I guess the trick is if we expect someone running eclipse -console to get the built in one in one case and Gogo in another. What are we expecting the user model to be?</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>Jeff</div>
</div>
<br>
</div>
Jeff McAffer | 2 Dec 16:26 2010

Re: 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-j9T/66MeVpFAfugRpC6u6w@public.gmane.org
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev

<div>The disadvantage is usability. &nbsp;Right now you get equinox and run with -console and its all good. &nbsp;If we break it out you'll have to get two bundles and make sure that the console bundle is started...<div><br></div>
<div>We have thought about shipping two setups, one with the console and one without. &nbsp;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. &nbsp;</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>Perhaps the new starter kit direction we've been exploring could offer some help...</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>Anyway, there is a lot of pressure to improve ease of use so we need to keep that in mind through these changes.</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>
<div>Jeff
</div>
<br><div>
<div>On 2010-12-01, at 6:02 PM, Alex Blewitt wrote:</div>
<br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite">
<div>
<div>
<div>On 1 Dec 2010, at 22:06, Thomas Watson wrote:</div>
<br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite"><div><p>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.<br><br>
Tom<br><br>
[1] <a href="https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=317827">https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=317827</a></p></div></blockquote>One other advantage would be in slimming down Equinox by providing the console in a separate bundle from the main OSGi runtime.</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>Alex</div>
</div>_______________________________________________<br>equinox-dev mailing list<br><a href="mailto:equinox-dev@...">equinox-dev@...</a><br>https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev<br>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</div>
Thomas Watson | 2 Dec 16:49 2010
Picon

Re: 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



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


From:

Jeff McAffer <jeff-yiTCNibefIkYhU31cYVdIwC/G2K4zDHf@public.gmane.org>

To:

Equinox development mailing list <equinox-dev <at> eclipse.org>

Date:

12/02/2010 09:37 AM

Subject:

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-j9T/66MeVpFAfugRpC6u6w@public.gmane.org
      https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev
_______________________________________________
equinox-dev mailing list
equinox-dev-j9T/66MeVpFAfugRpC6u6w@public.gmane.org
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev


<div>
<p>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.<br><br>
Tom<br><br><br><br>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<br><br></p>
<table width="100%" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0">
<tr valign="top">
<td width="1%">
<br>From:</td>
<td width="100%">
<br>Jeff McAffer &lt;jeff@...&gt;</td>
</tr>
<tr valign="top">
<td width="1%">
<br>To:</td>
<td width="100%">
<br>Equinox development mailing list &lt;equinox-dev <at> eclipse.org&gt;</td>
</tr>
<tr valign="top">
<td width="1%">
<br>Date:</td>
<td width="100%">
<br>12/02/2010 09:37 AM</td>
</tr>
<tr valign="top">
<td width="1%">
<br>Subject:</td>
<td width="100%">
<br>Re: [equinox-dev] Plans to replace the Console with GoGo for Indigo</td>
</tr>
</table>
<br><br><br>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...<br><br>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.  <br><br>Perhaps the new starter kit direction we've been exploring could offer some help...<br><br>Anyway, there is a lot of pressure to improve ease of use so we need to keep that in mind through these changes.<br><br>Jeff <br><br>On 2010-12-01, at 6:02 PM, Alex Blewitt wrote:<br><ul><ul>On 1 Dec 2010, at 22:06, Thomas Watson wrote:<br><ul><ul>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.<br><br>
Tom<br><br>
[1] <a href="https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=317827">https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=317827</a>
</ul></ul>One other advantage would be in slimming down Equinox by providing the console in a separate bundle from the main OSGi runtime.<br><br>Alex<br>_______________________________________________<br>
equinox-dev mailing list<br><a href="mailto:equinox-dev@...">equinox-dev@...</a><br><a href="https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev">https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev</a>
</ul></ul>_______________________________________________<br>
equinox-dev mailing list<br>
equinox-dev@...<br><a href="https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev">https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev</a><br><br><br>
</div>
Kirchev, Lazar | 2 Dec 17:51 2010
Picon

Re: 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-j9T/66MeVpFAfugRpC6u6w@public.gmane.org [mailto:equinox-dev-bounces-j9T/66MeVpFAfugRpC6u6w@public.gmane.org] 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



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


From:


Jeff McAffer <jeff-yiTCNibefIkYhU31cYVdIwC/G2K4zDHf@public.gmane.org>


To:


Equinox development mailing list <equinox-dev-j9T/66MeVpFAfugRpC6u6w@public.gmane.org>


Date:


12/02/2010 09:37 AM


Subject:


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 <at> eclipse.org
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev

_______________________________________________
equinox-dev mailing list
equinox-dev-j9T/66MeVpFAfugRpC6u6w@public.gmane.org
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev

<div><div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>For the extraction of the console in a separate bundle there is a bug opened:<p></p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><a href="https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=169603">https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=169603</a><p></p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>and a patch is provided there. <p></p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><p>&nbsp;</p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>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 &ndash; as a Gogo command, and the ConsoleSession interface available since 3.6.<p></p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><p>&nbsp;</p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>Also, currently the only way to run Gogo on top of Equinox is to start Equinox without the &ndash;console option, and make Gogo bundles initially started. So it is not possible to pass &ndash;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?<p></p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><p>&nbsp;</p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>Lazar<p></p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><p>&nbsp;</p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><p>&nbsp;</p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><p>&nbsp;</p></span></p>
<div><div><p class="MsoNormal"><span>From:</span><span> equinox-dev-bounces@... [mailto:equinox-dev-bounces@...] On Behalf Of Thomas Watson<br>Sent: Thursday, December 02, 2010 5:50 PM<br>To: Equinox development mailing list<br>Subject: Re: [equinox-dev] Plans to replace the Console with GoGo for Indigo<p></p></span></p></div></div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><p>&nbsp;</p></p>
<p>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.<br><br>Tom<br><br><br><br><span>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</span><p></p></p>
<table class="MsoNormalTable" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" width="100%">
<tr>
<td width="1%" valign="top"><p class="MsoNormal"><br><span>From:</span><p></p></p></td>
<td width="100%" valign="top"><p class="MsoNormal"><br><span>Jeff McAffer &lt;jeff@...&gt;</span><p></p></p></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="1%" valign="top"><p class="MsoNormal"><br><span>To:</span><p></p></p></td>
<td width="100%" valign="top"><p class="MsoNormal"><br><span>Equinox development mailing list &lt;equinox-dev@...&gt;</span><p></p></p></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="1%" valign="top"><p class="MsoNormal"><br><span>Date:</span><p></p></p></td>
<td width="100%" valign="top"><p class="MsoNormal"><br><span>12/02/2010 09:37 AM</span><p></p></p></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="1%" valign="top"><p class="MsoNormal"><br><span>Subject:</span><p></p></p></td>
<td width="100%" valign="top"><p class="MsoNormal"><br><span>Re: [equinox-dev] Plans to replace the Console with GoGo for Indigo</span><p></p></p></td>
</tr>
</table>
<div class="MsoNormal"></div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br><br><br><span>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...</span><br><br><span>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. </span><br><br><span>Perhaps the new starter kit direction we've been exploring could offer some help...</span><br><br><span>Anyway, there is a lot of pressure to improve ease of use so we need to keep that in mind through these changes.</span><br><br><span>Jeff </span><br><br><span>On 2010-12-01, at 6:02 PM, Alex Blewitt wrote:</span><p></p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>On 1 Dec 2010, at 22:06, Thomas Watson wrote:</span><p></p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>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.<br><br>Tom<br><br>[1] </span><a href="https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=317827"><span>https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=317827</span></a><p></p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>One other advantage would be in slimming down Equinox by providing the console in a separate bundle from the main OSGi runtime.</span><br><br><span>Alex</span><br><span>_______________________________________________<br>equinox-dev mailing list<span><br></span></span><a href="mailto:equinox-dev@..."><span>equinox-dev <at> eclipse.org</span></a><span><br><a href="https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev">https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev</a></span><p></p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>_______________________________________________</span><span><br>equinox-dev mailing list<br>equinox-dev@...<br><a href="https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev">https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev</a><br><br></span><p></p></p>
</div></div>
Thomas Watson | 2 Dec 19:44 2010
Picon

Re: Plans to replace the Console with GoGo for Indigo

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



"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


From:

"Kirchev, Lazar" <l.kirchev <at> sap.com>

To:

Equinox development mailing list <equinox-dev <at> eclipse.org>

Date:

12/02/2010 10:52 AM

Subject:

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 <at> eclipse.org [mailto:equinox-dev-bounces <at> eclipse.org] 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



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


From:

Jeff McAffer <jeff <at> eclipsesource.com>

To:

Equinox development mailing list <equinox-dev <at> eclipse.org>

Date:

12/02/2010 09:37 AM

Subject:

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 <at> eclipse.org
          https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev
_______________________________________________
equinox-dev mailing list
equinox-dev <at> eclipse.org
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev
_______________________________________________
equinox-dev mailing list
equinox-dev <at> eclipse.org
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev


<div>
<p>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 <a href="https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=169603">https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=169603</a><br><br>
Tom<br><br><br><br>"Kirchev, Lazar" ---12/02/2010 10:52:30 AM---For the extraction of the console in a separate bundle there is a bug opened: <a href="https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=169">https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=169</a><br><br></p>
<table width="100%" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0">
<tr valign="top">
<td width="1%">
<br>From:</td>
<td width="100%">
<br>"Kirchev, Lazar" &lt;l.kirchev <at> sap.com&gt;</td>
</tr>
<tr valign="top">
<td width="1%">
<br>To:</td>
<td width="100%">
<br>Equinox development mailing list &lt;equinox-dev <at> eclipse.org&gt;</td>
</tr>
<tr valign="top">
<td width="1%">
<br>Date:</td>
<td width="100%">
<br>12/02/2010 10:52 AM</td>
</tr>
<tr valign="top">
<td width="1%">
<br>Subject:</td>
<td width="100%">
<br>Re: [equinox-dev] Plans to replace the Console with GoGo for Indigo</td>
</tr>
</table>
<br><br><br>For the extraction of the console in a separate bundle there is a bug opened:<br><a href="https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=169603">https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=169603</a><br>and a patch is provided there. <br> <br>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 &ndash; as a Gogo command, and the ConsoleSession interface available since 3.6.<br> <br>Also, currently the only way to run Gogo on top of Equinox is to start Equinox without the &ndash;console option, and make Gogo bundles initially started. So it is not possible to pass &ndash;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?<br> <br>Lazar<br> <br> <br> <br>From: equinox-dev-bounces <at> eclipse.org [<a href="mailto:equinox-dev-bounces <at> eclipse.org">mailto:equinox-dev-bounces <at> eclipse.org</a>] On Behalf Of Thomas Watson<br>
Sent: Thursday, December 02, 2010 5:50 PM<br>
To: Equinox development mailing list<br>
Subject: Re: [equinox-dev] Plans to replace the Console with GoGo for Indigo<br> 
<p>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.<br><br>
Tom<br><br><br><br>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
</p>
<p>
</p>
<table width="100%" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0">
<tr valign="top">
<td width="22%">
<br>
From:</td>
<td width="78%">
<br>
Jeff McAffer &lt;jeff <at> eclipsesource.com&gt;</td>
</tr>
<tr valign="top">
<td width="22%">
<br>
To:</td>
<td width="78%">
<br>
Equinox development mailing list &lt;equinox-dev <at> eclipse.org&gt;</td>
</tr>
<tr valign="top">
<td width="22%">
<br>
Date:</td>
<td width="78%">
<br>
12/02/2010 09:37 AM</td>
</tr>
<tr valign="top">
<td width="22%">
<br>
Subject:</td>
<td width="78%">
<br>
Re: [equinox-dev] Plans to replace the Console with GoGo for Indigo</td>
</tr>
</table>
<br><br><br><br>
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...<br><br>
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. <br><br>
Perhaps the new starter kit direction we've been exploring could offer some help...<br><br>
Anyway, there is a lot of pressure to improve ease of use so we need to keep that in mind through these changes.<br><br>
Jeff <br><br>
On 2010-12-01, at 6:02 PM, Alex Blewitt wrote:
<ul><ul><ul><ul>On 1 Dec 2010, at 22:06, Thomas Watson wrote:
<ul><ul><ul><ul>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.<br><br>
Tom<br><br>
[1] <a href="https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=317827">https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=317827</a>
</ul></ul></ul></ul>One other advantage would be in slimming down Equinox by providing the console in a separate bundle from the main OSGi runtime.<br><br>
Alex<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
equinox-dev mailing list<br><a href="mailto:equinox-dev <at> eclipse.org">equinox-dev <at> eclipse.org</a><br><a href="https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev">https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev</a>
</ul></ul></ul></ul>_______________________________________________<br>
equinox-dev mailing list<br>
equinox-dev <at> eclipse.org<br><a href="https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev">https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev</a><br>_______________________________________________<br>
equinox-dev mailing list<br>
equinox-dev <at> eclipse.org<br><a href="https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev">https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev</a><br><br><br>
</div>
Jeff McAffer | 3 Dec 01:59 2010

Re: Plans to replace the Console with GoGo for Indigo

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-y6kNeMnOB+c@public.gmane.org>
<ecblank.gif>
To:
<ecblank.gif>
Equinox development mailing list <equinox-dev-j9T/66MeVpFAfugRpC6u6w@public.gmane.org>
<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 <at> eclipse.org [mailto:equinox-dev-bounces <at> eclipse.org] 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-yiTCNibefIkYhU31cYVdIwC/G2K4zDHf@public.gmane.org>
<34743407.jpg>
To:
<34519726.jpg>
Equinox development mailing list <equinox-dev-j9T/66MeVpFAfugRpC6u6w@public.gmane.org>
<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-j9T/66MeVpFAfugRpC6u6w@public.gmane.org
          https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev
_______________________________________________
equinox-dev mailing list
equinox-dev-j9T/66MeVpFAfugRpC6u6w@public.gmane.org
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev
_______________________________________________
equinox-dev mailing list
equinox-dev-j9T/66MeVpFAfugRpC6u6w@public.gmane.org
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev


_______________________________________________
equinox-dev mailing list
equinox-dev-j9T/66MeVpFAfugRpC6u6w@public.gmane.org
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev

<div>IMHO the bar for Indigo is pretty low. &nbsp;We need to make sure that Gogo can run properly on Equinox. &nbsp;All servicability extension work can be focused on using Gogo. Having a way to disable the current console would be interesting but not essential. &nbsp;Don't want the console? &nbsp;don't put -console on the command line. &nbsp;<div><br></div>
<div>I'm reluctant to put any logic in the framework or launcher to choose between consoles or search for console implementations or... &nbsp;People shipping configurations where they want to use Gogo should setup their config to have Gogo installed and started. &nbsp;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.<div><br></div>
<div>So, what do we actually have to do here?</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>Jeff</div>
<div>
<div><br></div>
<div><div>
<br><div>
<div>On 2010-12-02, at 1:44 PM, Thomas Watson wrote:</div>
<br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite">
<div>
<p>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 <a href="https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=169603">https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=169603</a><br><br>
Tom<br><br><br><br><span>&lt;graycol.gif&gt;</span>"Kirchev, Lazar" ---12/02/2010 10:52:30 AM---For the extraction of the console in a separate bundle there is a bug opened: <a href="https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=169">https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=169</a><br><br></p>
<table width="100%" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0">
<tr valign="top">
<td width="1%">
<span>&lt;ecblank.gif&gt;</span><br>From:</td>
<td width="100%">
<span>&lt;ecblank.gif&gt;</span><br>"Kirchev, Lazar" &lt;<a href="mailto:l.kirchev@...">l.kirchev@...</a>&gt;</td>
</tr>
<tr valign="top">
<td width="1%">
<span>&lt;ecblank.gif&gt;</span><br>To:</td>
<td width="100%">
<span>&lt;ecblank.gif&gt;</span><br>Equinox development mailing list &lt;<a href="mailto:equinox-dev@...">equinox-dev@...</a>&gt;</td>
</tr>
<tr valign="top">
<td width="1%">
<span>&lt;ecblank.gif&gt;</span><br>Date:</td>
<td width="100%">
<span>&lt;ecblank.gif&gt;</span><br>12/02/2010 10:52 AM</td>
</tr>
<tr valign="top">
<td width="1%">
<span>&lt;ecblank.gif&gt;</span><br>Subject:</td>
<td width="100%">
<span>&lt;ecblank.gif&gt;</span><br>Re: [equinox-dev] Plans to replace the Console with GoGo for Indigo</td>
</tr>
</table>
<br><br><br>For the extraction of the console in a separate bundle there is a bug opened:<br><a href="https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=169603">https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=169603</a><br>and a patch is provided there. <br> <br>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 &ndash; as a Gogo command, and the ConsoleSession interface available since 3.6.<br> <br>Also, currently the only way to run Gogo on top of Equinox is to start Equinox without the &ndash;console option, and make Gogo bundles initially started. So it is not possible to pass &ndash;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?<br> <br>Lazar<br> <br> <br> <br>From: <a href="mailto:equinox-dev-bounces@...">equinox-dev-bounces <at> eclipse.org</a> [<a href="mailto:equinox-dev-bounces@...">mailto:equinox-dev-bounces <at> eclipse.org</a>] On Behalf Of Thomas Watson<br>
Sent: Thursday, December 02, 2010 5:50 PM<br>
To: Equinox development mailing list<br>
Subject: Re: [equinox-dev] Plans to replace the Console with GoGo for Indigo<br> <p>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.<br><br>
Tom<br><br><br><br><span>&lt;graycol.gif&gt;</span>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
</p>
<p>
</p>
<table width="100%" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0">
<tr valign="top">
<td width="22%">
<span>&lt;34743407.jpg&gt;</span><br>
From:</td>
<td width="78%">
<span>&lt;34519726.jpg&gt;</span><br>
Jeff McAffer &lt;<a href="mailto:jeff@...">jeff@...</a>&gt;</td>
</tr>
<tr valign="top">
<td width="22%">
<span>&lt;34743407.jpg&gt;</span><br>
To:</td>
<td width="78%">
<span>&lt;34519726.jpg&gt;</span><br>
Equinox development mailing list &lt;<a href="mailto:equinox-dev@...">equinox-dev@...</a>&gt;</td>
</tr>
<tr valign="top">
<td width="22%">
<span>&lt;34743407.jpg&gt;</span><br>
Date:</td>
<td width="78%">
<span>&lt;34519726.jpg&gt;</span><br>
12/02/2010 09:37 AM</td>
</tr>
<tr valign="top">
<td width="22%">
<span>&lt;34743407.jpg&gt;</span><br>
Subject:</td>
<td width="78%">
<span>&lt;34519726.jpg&gt;</span><br>
Re: [equinox-dev] Plans to replace the Console with GoGo for Indigo</td>
</tr>
</table>
<br><br><br><br>
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...<br><br>
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. <br><br>
Perhaps the new starter kit direction we've been exploring could offer some help...<br><br>
Anyway, there is a lot of pressure to improve ease of use so we need to keep that in mind through these changes.<br><br>
Jeff <br><br>
On 2010-12-01, at 6:02 PM, Alex Blewitt wrote:
<ul><ul><ul><ul>On 1 Dec 2010, at 22:06, Thomas Watson wrote:
<ul><ul><ul><ul>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.<br><br>
Tom<br><br>
[1] <a href="https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=317827">https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=317827</a>
</ul></ul></ul></ul>One other advantage would be in slimming down Equinox by providing the console in a separate bundle from the main OSGi runtime.<br><br>
Alex<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
equinox-dev mailing list<br><a href="mailto:equinox-dev@...">equinox-dev@...</a><br><a href="https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev">https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev</a>
</ul></ul></ul></ul>_______________________________________________<br>
equinox-dev mailing list<br><a href="mailto:equinox-dev@...">equinox-dev@...</a><br><a href="https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev">https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev</a><br>_______________________________________________<br>
equinox-dev mailing list<br><a href="mailto:equinox-dev@...">equinox-dev@...</a><br><a href="https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev">https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev</a><br><br><br>
</div>_______________________________________________<br>equinox-dev mailing list<br><a href="mailto:equinox-dev@...">equinox-dev@...</a><br>https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev<br>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
BJ Hargrave | 3 Dec 02:25 2010
Picon

Re: 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.
--

BJ Hargrave
Senior Technical Staff Member, IBM
OSGi Fellow and CTO of the OSGi Alliance
hargrave <at> us.ibm.com

office: +1 386 848 1781
mobile: +1 386 848 3788






From:        Jeff McAffer <jeff <at> eclipsesource.com>
To:        Equinox development mailing list <equinox-dev <at> eclipse.org>
Date:        2010/12/02 20:00
Subject:        Re: [equinox-dev] Plans to replace the Console with GoGo for Indigo
Sent by:        equinox-dev-bounces <at> eclipse.org



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 <at> sap.com>
<ecblank.gif>
To:
<ecblank.gif>
Equinox development mailing list <equinox-dev <at> eclipse.org>
<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 <at> eclipse.org [mailto:equinox-dev-bounces <at> eclipse.org] 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 <at> eclipsesource.com>
<34743407.jpg>
To:
<34519726.jpg>
Equinox development mailing list <equinox-dev <at> eclipse.org>
<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 <at> eclipse.org
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev
_______________________________________________
equinox-dev mailing list
equinox-dev <at> eclipse.org
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev
_______________________________________________
equinox-dev mailing list
equinox-dev <at> eclipse.org
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev


_______________________________________________
equinox-dev mailing list
equinox-dev <at> eclipse.org
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev
_______________________________________________
equinox-dev mailing list
equinox-dev <at> eclipse.org
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev

<div>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.
<br>-- 
<p>
</p>
<table><tr valign="top">
<td>BJ Hargrave<br>
Senior Technical Staff Member, IBM<br>
OSGi Fellow and CTO of the <a href="http://www.osgi.org/">OSGi
Alliance</a><br><a href="mailto:hargrave <at> us.ibm.com" target="nw">hargrave <at> us.ibm.com</a>
</td>
<td>
<div align="right">
<br>
office: +1 386 848 1781<br>
mobile: +1 386 848 3788</div>
</td>
</tr></table>
<br><br>
<br><br><br><br>From: &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;
&nbsp;Jeff McAffer &lt;jeff <at> eclipsesource.com&gt;
<br>To: &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;
&nbsp;Equinox development
mailing list &lt;equinox-dev <at> eclipse.org&gt;
<br>Date: &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;
&nbsp;2010/12/02 20:00
<br>Subject: &nbsp; &nbsp;
&nbsp; &nbsp;Re: [equinox-dev]
Plans to replace the Console with GoGo for Indigo
<br>Sent by: &nbsp; &nbsp;
&nbsp; &nbsp;equinox-dev-bounces <at> eclipse.org
<br><br><br><br>IMHO the bar for Indigo is pretty low. &nbsp;We need to
make sure that Gogo can run properly on Equinox. &nbsp;All servicability
extension work can be focused on using Gogo. Having a way to disable the
current console would be interesting but not essential. &nbsp;Don't want
the console? &nbsp;don't put -console on the command line. &nbsp;
<br><br>I'm reluctant to put any logic in the framework or launcher
to choose between consoles or search for console implementations or...
&nbsp;People shipping configurations where they want to use Gogo should
setup their config to have Gogo installed and started. &nbsp;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.
<br><br>So, what do we actually have to do here?
<br><br>Jeff
<br><br><br>On 2010-12-02, at 1:44 PM, Thomas Watson wrote:
<br><p>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 <a href="https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=169603">https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=169603</a><br><br>
Tom<br><br><br><br>
&lt;graycol.gif&gt;"Kirchev, Lazar"
---12/02/2010 10:52:30 AM---For the extraction of the console in a separate
bundle there is a bug opened: <a href="https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=169">https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=169</a><br>
</p>
<table width="100%">
<tr valign="top">
<td width="20%">&lt;ecblank.gif&gt;<br>
From:
</td>
<td width="79%">&lt;ecblank.gif&gt;<br>
"Kirchev, Lazar" &lt;<a href="mailto:l.kirchev <at> sap.com">l.kirchev <at> sap.com</a>&gt;
</td>
</tr>
<tr valign="top">
<td>&lt;ecblank.gif&gt;<br>
To:
</td>
<td>&lt;ecblank.gif&gt;<br>
Equinox development mailing list &lt;<a href="mailto:equinox-dev <at> eclipse.org">equinox-dev <at> eclipse.org</a>&gt;
</td>
</tr>
<tr valign="top">
<td>&lt;ecblank.gif&gt;<br>
Date:
</td>
<td>&lt;ecblank.gif&gt;<br>
12/02/2010 10:52 AM
</td>
</tr>
<tr valign="top">
<td>&lt;ecblank.gif&gt;<br>
Subject:
</td>
<td>&lt;ecblank.gif&gt;<br>
Re: [equinox-dev] Plans to replace the Console with GoGo for Indigo</td>
</tr>
</table>
<p>
</p>
<br><br><br>
For the extraction of the console in a separate bundle there is a bug opened:<br><a href="https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=169603">https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=169603</a><br>
and a patch is provided there. <br><br>
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 &ndash; as a Gogo command, and
the ConsoleSession interface available since 3.6.<br><br>
Also, currently the only way to run Gogo on top of Equinox is to start
Equinox without the &ndash;console option, and make Gogo bundles initially started.
So it is not possible to pass &ndash;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?<br><br>
Lazar<br><br><br><br>
From: <a href="mailto:equinox-dev-bounces <at> eclipse.org">equinox-dev-bounces <at> eclipse.org</a>
[<a href="mailto:equinox-dev-bounces <at> eclipse.org">mailto:equinox-dev-bounces <at> eclipse.org</a>]
On Behalf Of Thomas Watson<br>
Sent: Thursday, December 02, 2010 5:50 PM<br>
To: Equinox development mailing list<br>
Subject: Re: [equinox-dev] Plans to replace the Console with GoGo for
Indigo
<p>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.<br><br>
Tom<br><br><br><br>
&lt;graycol.gif&gt;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 
</p>
<p>
</p>
<table width="100%">
<tr valign="top">
<td width="23%">&lt;34743407.jpg&gt;<br>
From:
</td>
<td width="76%">&lt;34519726.jpg&gt;<br>
Jeff McAffer &lt;<a href="mailto:jeff <at> eclipsesource.com">jeff <at> eclipsesource.com</a>&gt;
</td>
</tr>
<tr valign="top">
<td>&lt;34743407.jpg&gt;<br>
To:
</td>
<td>&lt;34519726.jpg&gt;<br>
Equinox development mailing list &lt;<a href="mailto:equinox-dev <at> eclipse.org">equinox-dev <at> eclipse.org</a>&gt;
</td>
</tr>
<tr valign="top">
<td>&lt;34743407.jpg&gt;<br>
Date:
</td>
<td>&lt;34519726.jpg&gt;<br>
12/02/2010 09:37 AM
</td>
</tr>
<tr valign="top">
<td>&lt;34743407.jpg&gt;<br>
Subject:
</td>
<td>&lt;34519726.jpg&gt;<br>
Re: [equinox-dev] Plans to replace the Console with GoGo for Indigo</td>
</tr>
</table>
<p>
</p>
<br><br><br><br>
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...<br><br>
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. <br><br>
Perhaps the new starter kit direction we've been exploring could offer
some help...<br><br>
Anyway, there is a lot of pressure to improve ease of use so we need to
keep that in mind through these changes.<br><br>
Jeff <br><br>
On 2010-12-01, at 6:02 PM, Alex Blewitt wrote: 
<br>On 1 Dec 2010, at 22:06, Thomas
Watson wrote: 
<br>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.<br><br>
Tom<br><br>
[1] <a href="https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=317827">https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=317827</a>
<br>One other advantage would be in
slimming down Equinox by providing the console in a separate bundle from
the main OSGi runtime.<br><br>
Alex<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
equinox-dev mailing list<br><a href="mailto:equinox-dev <at> eclipse.org">equinox-dev <at> eclipse.org</a><br><a href="https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev">https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev</a>
<br>_______________________________________________<br>
equinox-dev mailing list<br><a href="mailto:equinox-dev <at> eclipse.org">equinox-dev <at> eclipse.org</a><br><a href="https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev">https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev</a><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
equinox-dev mailing list<br><a href="mailto:equinox-dev <at> eclipse.org">equinox-dev <at> eclipse.org</a><br><a href="https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev">https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev</a><br><br>
<br>_______________________________________________<br>
equinox-dev mailing list<br><a href="mailto:equinox-dev <at> eclipse.org">equinox-dev <at> eclipse.org</a><br><a href="https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev">https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev</a>
<br>_______________________________________________<br>
equinox-dev mailing list<br>
equinox-dev <at> eclipse.org<br><a href="https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev">https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev</a><br>
<br>
</div>
Kirchev, Lazar | 3 Dec 10:58 2010
Picon

Re: Plans to replace the Console with GoGo for Indigo

Technically if the framework is configured with the Gogo bundles to be installed and started, and is run without the –console option, it should work just fine. But users are accustomed to use the -console option. When they eventually start Equinox, configured with Gogo, with the –console option, they will have a framework with two shells, fighting with each other for resources. This may be a problem.

 

Lazar

 

From: equinox-dev-bounces <at> eclipse.org [mailto:equinox-dev-bounces-j9T/66MeVpFAfugRpC6u6w@public.gmane.org] On Behalf Of Jeff McAffer
Sent: Friday, December 03, 2010 3:00 AM
To: Equinox development mailing list
Subject: Re: [equinox-dev] Plans to replace the Console with GoGo for Indigo

 

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-y6kNeMnOB+c@public.gmane.org>

<ecblank.gif>
To:

<ecblank.gif>
Equinox development mailing list <equinox-dev-j9T/66MeVpFAfugRpC6u6w@public.gmane.org>

<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-j9T/66MeVpFAfugRpC6u6w@public.gmane.org [mailto:equinox-dev-bounces <at> eclipse.org] 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-yiTCNibefIkYhU31cYVdIwC/G2K4zDHf@public.gmane.org>

<34743407.jpg>
To:

<34519726.jpg>
Equinox development mailing list <equinox-dev-j9T/66MeVpFAfugRpC6u6w@public.gmane.org>

<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-j9T/66MeVpFAfugRpC6u6w@public.gmane.org
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev

_______________________________________________
equinox-dev mailing list
equinox-dev-j9T/66MeVpFAfugRpC6u6w@public.gmane.org
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev
_______________________________________________
equinox-dev mailing list
equinox-dev <at> eclipse.org
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev

_______________________________________________
equinox-dev mailing list
equinox-dev-j9T/66MeVpFAfugRpC6u6w@public.gmane.org
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev

 

<div><div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>Technically if the framework is configured with the Gogo bundles to be installed and started, and is run without the &ndash;console option, it should work just fine. But users are accustomed to use the -console option. When they eventually start Equinox, configured with Gogo, with the &ndash;console option, they will have a framework with two shells, fighting with each other for resources. This may be a problem.<p></p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><p>&nbsp;</p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>Lazar<p></p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><p>&nbsp;</p></span></p>
<div><div><p class="MsoNormal"><span>From:</span><span> equinox-dev-bounces <at> eclipse.org [mailto:equinox-dev-bounces@...] On Behalf Of Jeff McAffer<br>Sent: Friday, December 03, 2010 3:00 AM<br>To: Equinox development mailing list<br>Subject: Re: [equinox-dev] Plans to replace the Console with GoGo for Indigo<p></p></span></p></div></div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><p>&nbsp;</p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">IMHO the bar for Indigo is pretty low. &nbsp;We need to make sure that Gogo can run properly on Equinox. &nbsp;All servicability extension work can be focused on using Gogo. Having a way to disable the current console would be interesting but not essential. &nbsp;Don't want the console? &nbsp;don't put -console on the command line. &nbsp;<p></p></p>
<div><p class="MsoNormal"><p>&nbsp;</p></p></div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">I'm reluctant to put any logic in the framework or launcher to choose between consoles or search for console implementations or... &nbsp;People shipping configurations where they want to use Gogo should setup their config to have Gogo installed and started. &nbsp;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.<p></p></p>
<div><p class="MsoNormal"><p>&nbsp;</p></p></div>
<div><p class="MsoNormal">So, what do we actually have to do here?<p></p></p></div>
<div><p class="MsoNormal"><p>&nbsp;</p></p></div>
<div><p class="MsoNormal">Jeff<p></p></p></div>
<div>
<div><p class="MsoNormal"><p>&nbsp;</p></p></div>
<div><div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><p>&nbsp;</p></p>
<div>
<div><p class="MsoNormal">On 2010-12-02, at 1:44 PM, Thomas Watson wrote:<p></p></p></div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br><br><p></p></p>
<div>
<p>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 <a href="https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=169603">https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=169603</a><br><br>Tom<br><br><br><br>&lt;graycol.gif&gt;<span>"Kirchev, Lazar" ---12/02/2010 10:52:30 AM---For the extraction of the console in a separate bundle there is a bug opened: <a href="https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=169">https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=169</a></span><p></p></p>
<table class="MsoNormalTable" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" width="100%">
<tr>
<td width="1%" valign="top"><p class="MsoNormal">&lt;ecblank.gif&gt;<br><span>From:</span><p></p></p></td>
<td width="100%" valign="top"><p class="MsoNormal">&lt;ecblank.gif&gt;<br><span>"Kirchev, Lazar" &lt;<a href="mailto:l.kirchev@...">l.kirchev@...</a>&gt;</span><p></p></p></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="1%" valign="top"><p class="MsoNormal">&lt;ecblank.gif&gt;<br><span>To:</span><p></p></p></td>
<td width="100%" valign="top"><p class="MsoNormal">&lt;ecblank.gif&gt;<br><span>Equinox development mailing list &lt;<a href="mailto:equinox-dev@...">equinox-dev@...</a>&gt;</span><p></p></p></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="1%" valign="top"><p class="MsoNormal">&lt;ecblank.gif&gt;<br><span>Date:</span><p></p></p></td>
<td width="100%" valign="top"><p class="MsoNormal">&lt;ecblank.gif&gt;<br><span>12/02/2010 10:52 AM</span><p></p></p></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="1%" valign="top"><p class="MsoNormal">&lt;ecblank.gif&gt;<br><span>Subject:</span><p></p></p></td>
<td width="100%" valign="top"><p class="MsoNormal">&lt;ecblank.gif&gt;<br><span>Re: [equinox-dev] Plans to replace the Console with GoGo for Indigo</span><p></p></p></td>
</tr>
</table>
<div class="MsoNormal"></div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br><br><br><span>For the extraction of the console in a separate bundle there is a bug opened:</span><br><a href="https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=169603"><span>https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=169603</span></a><br><span>and a patch is provided there. </span><br><br><span>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 &ndash; as a Gogo command, and the ConsoleSession interface available since 3.6.</span><br><br><span>Also, currently the only way to run Gogo on top of Equinox is to start Equinox without the &ndash;console option, and make Gogo bundles initially started. So it is not possible to pass &ndash;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?</span><br><br><span>Lazar</span><br><br><br><br><span>From:</span><span> <a href="mailto:equinox-dev-bounces@...">equinox-dev-bounces@...</a> [<a href="mailto:equinox-dev-bounces@...">mailto:equinox-dev-bounces <at> eclipse.org</a>] On Behalf Of Thomas Watson<br>Sent: Thursday, December 02, 2010 5:50 PM<br>To: Equinox development mailing list<br>Subject: Re: [equinox-dev] Plans to replace the Console with GoGo for Indigo</span><p></p></p>
<p><span>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.<br><br>Tom<br><br><br><br></span>&lt;graycol.gif&gt;<span>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</span> <p></p></p>
<table class="MsoNormalTable" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" width="100%">
<tr>
<td width="22%" valign="top"><p class="MsoNormal">&lt;34743407.jpg&gt;<span><br>From:</span><p></p></p></td>
<td width="78%" valign="top"><p class="MsoNormal">&lt;34519726.jpg&gt;<br>Jeff McAffer &lt;<a href="mailto:jeff@...">jeff@...</a>&gt;<p></p></p></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="22%" valign="top"><p class="MsoNormal">&lt;34743407.jpg&gt;<span><br>To:</span><p></p></p></td>
<td width="78%" valign="top"><p class="MsoNormal">&lt;34519726.jpg&gt;<br>Equinox development mailing list &lt;<a href="mailto:equinox-dev@...">equinox-dev@...</a>&gt;<p></p></p></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="22%" valign="top"><p class="MsoNormal">&lt;34743407.jpg&gt;<span><br>Date:</span><p></p></p></td>
<td width="78%" valign="top"><p class="MsoNormal">&lt;34519726.jpg&gt;<br>12/02/2010 09:37 AM<p></p></p></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="22%" valign="top"><p class="MsoNormal">&lt;34743407.jpg&gt;<span><br>Subject:</span><p></p></p></td>
<td width="78%" valign="top"><p class="MsoNormal">&lt;34519726.jpg&gt;<br>Re: [equinox-dev] Plans to replace the Console with GoGo for Indigo<p></p></p></td>
</tr>
</table>
<div class="MsoNormal"></div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br><span><br><br></span><span><br>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...</span><span><br></span><span><br>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. </span><span><br></span><span><br>Perhaps the new starter kit direction we've been exploring could offer some help...</span><span><br></span><span><br>Anyway, there is a lot of pressure to improve ease of use so we need to keep that in mind through these changes.</span><span><br></span><span><br>Jeff </span><span><br></span><span><br>On 2010-12-01, at 6:02 PM, Alex Blewitt wrote:</span> <p></p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>On 1 Dec 2010, at 22:06, Thomas Watson wrote:</span> <p></p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>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.<br><br>Tom<br><br>[1] </span><a href="https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=317827"><span>https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=317827</span></a><p></p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>One other advantage would be in slimming down Equinox by providing the console in a separate bundle from the main OSGi runtime.</span><span><br></span><span><br>Alex<br>_______________________________________________<br>equinox-dev mailing list</span><span><br></span><a href="mailto:equinox-dev@..."><span>equinox-dev@...</span></a><span><br></span><a href="https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev"><span>https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev</span></a><p></p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>_______________________________________________<br>equinox-dev mailing list<br><a href="mailto:equinox-dev@...">equinox-dev@...</a><span><br></span></span><a href="https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev"><span>https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev</span></a><span><br></span><span>_______________________________________________</span><span><br>equinox-dev mailing list<br><a href="mailto:equinox-dev@...">equinox-dev <at> eclipse.org</a><br><a href="https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev">https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev</a><br><br></span><p></p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal">_______________________________________________<br>equinox-dev mailing list<br><a href="mailto:equinox-dev@...">equinox-dev@...</a><br>https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/equinox-dev<p></p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><p>&nbsp;</p></p>
</div></div>
</div>
</div>
</div></div>

Gmane