-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256
Hi,
I have a patch to improve thread safety in jtorctl. How should I submit it?
Cheers, Michael
Hi Michael, glad you want to help! JTorCtl is pretty much unmaintained (it was last committed to in 2009), but if you file a ticket on https://trac.torproject.org we might be able to get it merged.
Karsten, you're the last person to touch that project. Thoughts on the component for the ticket?
Cheers! -Damian
On 04/04/14 04:02, Damian Johnson wrote:
Hi Michael, glad you want to help! JTorCtl is pretty much unmaintained (it was last committed to in 2009), but if you file a ticket on https://trac.torproject.org we might be able to get it merged.
Karsten, you're the last person to touch that project. Thoughts on the component for the ticket?
Wow, JTorCtl is probably not just unmaintained, but also probably doesn't have a single application using it since 2009. There's a reason why it's sorted into the "Attic" group on https://gitweb.torproject.org/.
Michael, are you working on JTorCtl because you want to help out with writing some Java code? If so, I might have some other fine Java code for you to hack on that is in active use:
https://gitweb.torproject.org/metrics-lib.git
https://gitweb.torproject.org/onionoo.git
https://gitweb.torproject.org/exonerator.git
https://gitweb.torproject.org/metrics-db.git
https://gitweb.torproject.org/metrics-web.git
Or are you using JTorCtl for some project of yours? In that case it might be easier to keep your own JTorCtl branch for now and ask for your changes to be merged when you publish your application. Of course, you could also open a Trac ticket and ask for review, but that might take between a while and forever.
All the best, Karsten
On 04/04/2014 02:54 AM, Karsten Loesing wrote:
Wow, JTorCtl is probably not just unmaintained, but also probably doesn't have a single application using it since 2009. There's a reason why it's sorted into the "Attic" group on https://gitweb.torproject.org/.
*ahem* Orbot represents 2 million users of jtorctl, and it works just fine for us (in our limited use of it).
https://gitweb.torproject.org/orbot.git/tree/HEAD:/external
+n
*ahem* Orbot represents 2 million users of jtorctl, and it works just fine for us (in our limited use of it).
Yay, sounds like we found a new owner for JTorCtl! ;)
Nathan, should Michael go ahead and file his pull request with the Orbot component then?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256
On 04/04/14 16:45, Nathan Freitas wrote:
On 04/04/2014 11:34 AM, Damian Johnson wrote:
Nathan, should Michael go ahead and file his pull request with the Orbot component then?
Sure! We can keep the JtorCtl repo on its own, and perhaps move it out of the attic.
I will review patches, test and merge.
Great, thanks! I'll create some tickets for the Orbot component.
Cheers, Michael
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256
On 04/04/14 15:44, Nathan Freitas wrote:
*ahem* Orbot represents 2 million users of jtorctl, and it works just fine for us (in our limited use of it).
Hehe, I was just this second cloning the Orbot repo to see if you were still using jtorctl. :-) Briar also uses it, as does Ploggy.
On 04/04/14 07:54, Karsten Loesing wrote:
Michael, are you working on JTorCtl because you want to help out with writing some Java code? If so, I might have some other fine Java code for you to hack on that is in active use:
I'd love to help, but right now I've got too much on my plate to take on any new projects. Sorry!
Or are you using JTorCtl for some project of yours? In that case it might be easier to keep your own JTorCtl branch for now and ask for your changes to be merged when you publish your application. Of course, you could also open a Trac ticket and ask for review, but that might take between a while and forever.
I'm happy to maintain a fork - that's what I've been doing until now, but I thought it might be useful to push my changes upstream. Here's a summary of the changes:
1. Make TorControlConnection thread-safe 2. Convert TorControlError and TorControlSyntaxError into checked exceptions 3. Reduce the visibility of classes and methods 4. Use the Java 1.5 foreach operator for readability 5. Fix formatting of javadoc comments
Points 2 and 3 might affect existing users of the library. I'm happy to post five small patches or one big patch for eventual review if you think Trac's the way to go.
Cheers, Michael
-
Damian Johnson -
Karsten Loesing -
Michael Rogers -
Nathan Freitas