felix-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Guillaume Nodet <gno...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [karaf] Switching from gshell to gogo
Date Thu, 02 Jul 2009 09:56:51 GMT
Well, if we consider switching, it *is* the right moment, as Karaf has
not done any release yet.
I'd rather do that before the first release than after.

That said, the commands will be the same as we would just port the
existing karaf commands for gshell to gogo, which currently has a very
minimal impact (change the base class and the package for annotations,
that's mostly it).
>From a syntax point of view, the difference now is that they would
look like osgi:list instead of osgi/list, but I'm quite sure I can
hack gogo to allow the customization of the separator.
I don't see any technical problems in porting the completers (which
are really helpful).

So in short, if I can configure gogo to use '/' instead of ':' as a
separator, it should be mostly transparent for end users.  People
having written commands would need to migrate though (but as I said,
it's easy to do).

On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 10:16, Charles Moulliard<cmoulliard@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi guillaume,
>
> From a technical point of view, this seems very interesting but is it the
> right moment to do this migration regarding to client(s) using Apache
> ServiceMix4, ... ? This will impact existing documents, tutorials, ...
>
> Regards,
>
> Charles Moulliard
> Senior Enterprise Architect
> Apache Camel Committer
>
> *****************************
> blog : http://cmoulliard.blogspot.com
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 8:08 AM, Guillaume Nodet <gnodet@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I've been considering swithing karaf shell from Geronimo Gshell to Felix
>> Gogo.
>> The main reasons are:
>>  * Gogo is/will implement OSGi RFC 0142 to standardize the shell
>> (it's not yet a spec, but should be in the future)
>>  * Gogo should be able to be used at launch time to run the framework
>>  * Gogo shell syntax is more powerfull, in addition to pipes, it
>> supports closures, loops, if / then / else ...
>>  * lightweight: < 100 ko vs > 1 Mo for gshell
>>
>> The drawbacks are:
>>  * yet another change in the syntax (we've already changed it when
>> between 1.0.0 and 1.1.0)
>>  * some more work is needed as we're currently missing completors,
>> history, banner
>>
>> Feedback welcome
>>
>> --
>> Cheers,
>> Guillaume Nodet
>> ------------------------
>> Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
>> ------------------------
>> Open Source SOA
>> http://fusesource.com
>>
>



-- 
Cheers,
Guillaume Nodet
------------------------
Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
------------------------
Open Source SOA
http://fusesource.com

Mime
View raw message