Bounty for MODxFS Fuse module completed

Fuse is a system for mounting data sources as a drive. Currently I use SSHFS quite a bit to mount my FTPs connections as drives.

How awesome would MODx be if you could mount the whole system as a drive? edit chunks with editors, templates with editors, and then just save.

http://freshmeat.net/projects/modxfs Current project lives there but appears abandoned. I have $200 bones for whoever can get it working, I think other developers could contribute as well and get a nice purse for an enterprising developer.

Support thread is here http://modxcms.com/forums/index.php?topic=17527

Shawn

404 Not Found for that page...

/k

Shaun, thanks for the initiative. I fixed the link as the trailing slash 404d

Best of luck.

Jay

I’m up for the challenge if no-one else has bitten?

I would also propose to do this as a generic kernel module for the major OS’s - FreeBSD, Linux, Solaris - as opposed to relying on the FUSE framework.

Would more people be interested if this were the case? If so I would like to launch this as a completely new project.

Quote from: Pandy06269 at Jul 01, 2009, 04:51 AM

I’m up for the challenge if no-one else has bitten?

I would also propose to do this as a generic kernel module for the major OS’s - FreeBSD, Linux, Solaris - as opposed to relying on the FUSE framework.

Would more people be interested if this were the case? If so I would like to launch this as a completely new project.

Am definitely interested...

cheers/k

I think the advantage of a fuse module is then it works on any system that fuse has been ported to (I think).

I should clarify, I’m only paying the bounty if it works on OS X as well, as that’s the system my shop uses.

I agree about the comment of working in any system that FUSE works on (it’s one thing I like about the .NET platform.) However a lot of the "other systems" are ports of FUSE, so I’m fairly certain (from experience) work would need to be done to match each platform anyway.

No worries about supporting OSX; IIRC it was a port of the FreeBSD kernel so shouldn’t be to dissimilar.

If I get that far, would you be able to do some testing (obviously on a machine with little importance!) I have no access to a Mac

I’m just a front end coder / developer so tell me to STFU anytime , but I believe FUSE is also being developed for windows, IMHO it would make development and maintenance easier, much like Adobe Air apps are write once, run anywhere (The new Java I guess).

This is true in theory, but not always in practice.

AFAICT the Windows (and Solaris) ports are just that - ports. This means there’s probably a fair chance that things will be different between platforms as they’re not coded by the original developer.

Take the .NET platform - it’s fine if you’re developing on different Windows versions (e.g. 2003, XP, Vista) but it won’t run on Unixes. However the Mono project is a port of the .NET platform to Unix, but an application written on the Windows .NET won’t natively on Mono without changing.

IMHO a file-system has to be stable and high-performance - being as close to the kernel as possible (i.e. a kernel module) is the only way to get this. Adding another layer of complexity (ie. FUSE) is unnecessary, could hurt performance and makes debugging difficult.

If the development is designed correctly, it should be fairly easy to tailor the module to different kernels.

Make it work on OSX and you have my portion of the bounty, I hope others will contribute as well.