RFC: Snappy shell

[Loïc Minier]

Yup, that's a fine idea too; I dont think it's an either or, both make
sense in different contexts

On Tue, Jun 16, 2015 at 4:55 PM, Dustin Kirkland <kirkland at canonical.com>
wrote:

> On Tue, Jun 16, 2015 at 3:44 AM, Loïc Minier <loic.minier at ubuntu.com>
> wrote:
> > Snappy shell needs not be required for all snappy based images and/or
> needs
> > not be on port 22, it is rather an optional interface to snappy, much
> like
> > webdm is an useful tool and default web user experience. (Perhaps it
> should
> > be implemented as a completely separate addon, but it felt more natural
> to
> > tie it to the main command-line tool.) Perhaps we'll have a snappy router
> > image where it makes sense to make this shell the default, with or
> without
> > direct shell access enabled, while a snappy media-center image would not
> > have it.
>
> What if it worked more like a database client, like mysql or psql?
>
> You run the "snappy connect ubuntu at host" locally, and the binary runs
> locally, sending commands and receiving responses to the target host
> over SSL.
>
> That seems cleaner, and nicer than running a shell on the host.
>
> Dustin Kirkland
> Canonical, Ltd.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/snappy-devel/attachments/20150616/17405f18/attachment.html>