Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

plugin system #1033

Closed
vfreex opened this issue Jan 4, 2017 · 4 comments
Closed

plugin system #1033

vfreex opened this issue Jan 4, 2017 · 4 comments
Labels

Comments

@vfreex
Copy link

vfreex commented Jan 4, 2017

Is there any proposal on implementing a plugin system?

If so, we are able to integrate obfs, tunneling protocols (like KCP), and other extensions without violating the KISS principle.

@wongsyrone
Copy link

@vfreex
Copy link
Author

vfreex commented Jan 4, 2017

Thanks.
It seems to me that the planed plugin system works more like a tunnel. It just help you start multiple processes in a command.

I am more interested in defining hooks in shadowsocks' source code so that developers can write shared libraries that will be loaded at runtime. That will give developers much more flexibility.

@Mygod
Copy link

Mygod commented Jan 4, 2017

Create forks and make changes there instead for now.

@librehat
Copy link

librehat commented Jan 4, 2017

@vfreex Do bear in mind that there are other implementations of shadowsocks. It would be much simpler for plugin developers to write their plugins (or tunnel services) with almost no restrictions (any programming languages, any licenses)

@madeye madeye closed this as completed Jan 8, 2017
@madeye madeye added the question label Jan 8, 2017
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

5 participants