Non-daemonized processes lock up the rest of the app

[alex-r-bigelow]

A side effect of this tangelo bug: kitware-data-solutions/tangelo#359

I should still be able to work around it, but I must still be saving the config file somewhere I shouldn't...

[waxlamp]

I am planning to cure that ailment by killing the patient. Maybe we should discuss the implications for tangelo-wrapper - @Yasashiku, let me know when you have a moment to chat about it.

[alex-r-bigelow]

Sounds fun :-) I’m up for a chat anytime Friday or almost any time next week.

I was actually planning on putting this on the back burner for a while - my goal for today was simply to get tangelo-wrapper to a usable state (I only have the pip install stuff left), and flag what’s not working so that I can pick it up again in a month or two. I assume the daemonize option is going away after all - everything will be non-daemonized? It should be pretty easy to nuke the daemon-relevant bits (and this bug) when it happens. I won't need the wrapping functionality for a long time, so I’m totally happy waiting to implement it.

Thanks,
-Alex

I’m up for a chat if there’s anything else

On Jul 23, 2014, at 12:56 PM, Roni Choudhury notifications@github.com wrote:

I am planning to cure that ailment by killing the patient. Maybe we should discuss the implications for tangelo-wrapper - @Yasashiku, let me know when you have a moment to chat about it.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

[waxlamp]

No chat necessary. This was basically what I wanted to discuss, that daemonization will become the responsibility of other tools - I will look into writing a simple upstart script, for example, and maybe find out how to create a systemd service (since that's what I use). The idea of using tangelo-wrapper to export a standalone "Tangelo app" is still possible, but it may be the case that managing Tangelo instances with tangelo-wrapper will mean that it simply runs various "in-console" Tangelo instances via subprocess or something.

Also, let's think of a more vivid name for tangelo-wrapper. How do you feel about "honeybell", which is apparently a particular type of Tangelo? Or else, what's a word that connotes a bag or box of fruit? Or preserved fruit?

[alex-r-bigelow]

Maybe tangelo-peel or tangelo-seeds? I’m fine with anything - you probably have a better idea of what would fit. Honeybell is just fine with me.

-Alex

On Jul 24, 2014, at 7:17 AM, Roni Choudhury notifications@github.com wrote:

No chat necessary. This was basically what I wanted to discuss, that daemonization will become the responsibility of other tools - I will look into writing a simple upstart script, for example, and maybe find out how to create a systemd service (since that's what I use). The idea of using tangelo-wrapper to export a standalone "Tangelo app" is still possible, but it may be the case that managing Tangelo instances with tangelo-wrapper will mean that it simply runs various "in-console" Tangelo instances via subprocess or something.

Also, let's think of a more vivid name for tangelo-wrapper. How do you feel about "honeybell", which is apparently a particular type of Tangelo? Or else, what's a word that connotes a bag or box of fruit? Or preserved fruit?

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.