ngrok VS hub

Thanks for the history. I maintain this list[0], and wasn't aware of OG localtunnel, likely because there's a somewhat newer and now more popular project with the same name[1]. You appear to be correct on timing. Here's the earliest commits on GitHub for each of the projects:

OG localtunnel (2010): https://github.com/progrium/localtunnel/tree/fb82920d9d3e538...

Other localtunnel (2012): https://github.com/localtunnel/localtunnel/tree/93d62b9dbb9f...

ngrok (2012): https://github.com/inconshreveable/ngrok/tree/8f4795ecac7f92...

I'll see that OG localtunnel gets added to the list for posterity.

[0]: https://github.com/anderspitman/awesome-tunneling

[1]: https://github.com/localtunnel/localtunnel

ngrok

if you're worried about the line "ngrok captures and analyzes all traffic over the tunnel for later inspection and replay" in https://github.com/inconshreveable/ngrok, I'd say that's a valid concern but not for ssh if you make sure the client knows what the host key is and does not accept a different one

To get a fix domain, we can deploy HTTP tunnel in our own server. ngrok also provides an open source version for server side deployment. But it is old 1.x version and not recommended to deploy at production with some serious reliability issues.

I ended up inspired by ngork structure here: https://github.com/inconshreveable/ngrok it doesn't really work well with go modules, since i will end up running project like this:

In Go, inconshreveable/ngrok and coyove/goflyway is well known, especially ngrok is popular among developers as a SaaS service.

> > DO NOT RUN THIS VERSION OF NGROK (1.X) IN PRODUCTION

> I don't see that anywhere.

I didn't find it on the website, but I did find it on the GitHub:

https://github.com/inconshreveable/ngrok

inconshreveable/ngrok (Go): Introspected tunnels to localhost

Try automating the PR process as much as possible. Make use of tools like hub CLI for speeding up the pull request process. Code quality tools can help you automate the due diligence for coding standards and conventions, and test automation tools can assist in bug discovery, and identifying security vulnerabilities.

parse_git_branch() { # Speed up opening up a new terminal tab by not # checking `$HOME` ...which can't be a repo anyway # # For the heck of it, micro-optimize this too: # time (repeat 1000000 { [ "$PWD" = "$HOME" ] } ) == ~4.2s # time (repeat 1000000 { [[ "$PWD" == "$HOME" ]] } ) == ~1.4s [[ "$PWD" == "$HOME" ]] && return # Fastest known way to check the current branch name # (Uses `command` to bypass wrappers like https://hub.github.com/) ref="$(command git symbolic-ref --short HEAD 2> /dev/null)" || return echo " [$ref]" }

Which will create a new remote with that name (otherwise origin will be used).

It is also less typing.

[1]: https://github.com/github/hub

I alias git to use HUB from GitHub

If you also install Hub https://github.com/github/hub it gives you a git create command, it also has a set of really useful additional CLI utilities.

SCM: Git + Hub (https://github.com/github/hub)

This is my favorite feature of this tool. Because every time I commit something and want to create PR/MR, I have to do a bunch of repetitive clicks here and there. On top of that, sometimes I have to work with GitHub, sometimes GitLab. So even if I wanna use the GitHub CLI tool hub or GitLab CLI tool glab, I am ending up using two different tools. So it's nice when I can open PR/MR just by a shortcut within a second or two regardless of what SCM I am on.

Hub - a wrapper for Git command (Git+Hub=GitHub).