Re: [cdt-dev] support for remote autotools

[Greg Watson <g.watson@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I’m ok with that, though a separate IDE project would probably be better. I’ve also already refactored the packages to org.eclipse.remote.* so I’d prefer not to change these again. Is that an issue?

Regards,
Greg

On Jan 20, 2014, at 10:11 AM, Doug Schaefer <DSchaefer@xxxxxxx> wrote:

> Do we want to bring that down into the CDT (and make you a committer? ;).
> 
> I still have on my list of things to do is to create an IDE project where
> we can put more general things like this but that¹s probably a few months
> away.
> 
> Doug.
> 
> On 1/20/2014, 8:49 AM, "Greg Watson" <g.watson@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
>> As a result of the summit last year, I separated the remote API out of
>> PTP into it¹s own repo and namespace with no other PTP dependencies. I
>> also provided an implementation directly on JSch. I hope this provides
>> enough incentive for it to be used by other projects.
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> Greg
>> 
>> On Jan 17, 2014, at 8:48 PM, Jeff Johnston <jjohnstn@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> 
>>> As the maintainer of the CDT Autotools plug-ins, if you are proposing
>>> making the Autotools
>>> plug-in remote-enabled by replacing existing calls with the new PTP
>>> platform
>>> APIs (i.e. no external dependencies), I wouldn't have issues
>>> as long as existing functionality is preserved. Any API, functionality,
>>> or UI changes, however, would require closer scrutiny.
>>> 
>>> I noticed that Rafael M. posted to the ptp-dev list in March
>>> of 2013 to offer help in adding PTP Autotools remote project support.
>>> Perhaps you
>>> could team up with him such that you could make changes to the
>>> Autotools plug-ins
>>> and he could add support on the RDT side if something isn't already in
>>> the works
>>> in PTP.
>>> 
>>> If you were instead planning on reviving my old proposal which used the
>>> project location, that would require buy-in from Doug.  That proposal
>>> was turned down,
>>> even though it removed the external dependencies on RDT/RSE via proxy.
>>> I should note that
>>> I did bring it up for discussion at the 2013 CDT Summit and it didn't
>>> gain any traction
>>> though Greg Watson proposed creating the new platform interfaces.  You
>>> would need a more
>>> detailed proposal to get the right people's attention and approval.
>>> There is the up-coming
>>> 2014 CDT Summit at EclipseCon if you are planning on attending.
>>> 
>>> -- Jeff J. 
>>> 
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>> From: "Rodrigo Fraxino Araujo" <rfaraujo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>> To: cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
>>>> Sent: Friday, January 17, 2014 7:23:12 AM
>>>> Subject: [cdt-dev] support for remote autotools
>>>> 
>>>> Hi,
>>>> 
>>>> From what I am aware, there is not any support for remote operations
>>>> into Autotools.  Im planning to implement this support by making use of
>>>> the interface developed by the PTP team. They managed to make it
>>>> independent of any remote services implementation, which imo would
>>>> be ideal for such case
>>>> (http://wiki.eclipse.org/PTP/designs/remote/API).
>>>> 
>>>> Is there anyone already working on this? Would this contribution be
>>>> welcomed by the CDT community?
>>>> 
>>>> Thanks.
>>>> 
>>>> Kind regards,
>>>> Rodrigo.
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> cdt-dev mailing list
>>>> cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
>>>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev
>>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> cdt-dev mailing list
>>> cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
>>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> cdt-dev mailing list
>> cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev
> 
> _______________________________________________
> cdt-dev mailing list
> cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev