karaf-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Guillaume Nodet <gno...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Add a scope feature-url
Date Tue, 22 May 2012 12:59:35 GMT
I don't quite agree with that.  I think subshell should be command (or
service) related and use resource nouns as prefixes to the command as
I don't really see something like:

or maybe
   jms browse queue
But the later is really not what we have so far, so that would require
just a full rework of all commands.  Not sure if it's worth it.

On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 2:51 PM, Christian Schneider
<chris@die-schneider.net> wrote:
> If we want to separate feature and feature-url  depends a bit on the meaning
> of a scope or subshell. I would like to design them around resources.
> In this view features are a resource and feature-urls are another resource.
> If you look at it this way you have a nice separation of nouns and verbs.
> The resources (subshells) are the nouns and the commands are the verbs.
> I think this view is much more natural than just grouping commands.
> It will also allow to extend this to more unusual usages that we currently
> can not yet support like:
>> jms:myqueue
> (jms:myqueue)> <tab>
> drop    purge    send    browse

I don't think that's a good idea to go that way.  If you start with
the resources, you can't really use completion to refine what you
want, because you'd have all the resources first (and that can be a
lot) and they would be all together, not grouped by type of resources.
 Also, when you type a command, you usually know what you want to do,
so starting by the resource does not really help imho.

> So a queue could also be a resource and have commands. This is a bit far
> away from where we are now but designing the subshells with resources in
> mind would help us to get there.
> Christian
> Am 22.05.2012 14:22, schrieb Guillaume Nodet:
>> I think the repository commands use the argument as the repository
>> name instead of the repository url.
>> Not sure about separating both.  It does not really help with
>> completion (as you need to type the ':' in addition to few<tab>  for
>> example), and given those are related, it looks more natural to me.  I
>> think subshells should be really independent and that's not the case
>> imho.
> --
> Christian Schneider
> http://www.liquid-reality.de
> Open Source Architect
> Talend Application Integration Division http://www.talend.com

Guillaume Nodet
Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
FuseSource, Integration everywhere

View raw message