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 <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, Jun 16, 2015 at 3:44 AM, Loïc Minier <[email protected]> > 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@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. >
-- snappy-devel mailing list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/snappy-devel
