activemq-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Hiram Chirino <hi...@hiramchirino.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Remove the old ActiveMQ Console
Date Wed, 08 Jan 2014 16:02:39 GMT
+1

On Wed, Jan 8, 2014 at 4:20 AM, Dejan Bosanac <dejan@nighttale.net> wrote:
> +1 from me as well. We have Jetty in and it should be easy to hot-deploy
> any war folks want to use for the web part of the broker. So we can exclude
> current web demos as well (which already don't start by default), then
> rework them and allow people to install them on demand. This will allow us
> to have much leaner broker installation.
>
> Regards
> --
> Dejan Bosanac
> ----------------------
> Red Hat, Inc.
> FuseSource is now part of Red Hat
> dbosanac@redhat.com
> Twitter: @dejanb
> Blog: http://sensatic.net
> ActiveMQ in Action: http://www.manning.com/snyder/
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 8, 2014 at 5:01 AM, Robert Davies <rajdavies@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I agree, this seems like the best approach so far.
>>
>> On 7 Jan 2014, at 23:27, Christian Posta <christian.posta@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > +1 @ Claus, Jim, and Tim's thread of the discussion.
>> >
>> > Moving the console to a subproject separates the code out enough and
>> > makes it "less intimidating" to those in the community that would like
>> > to approach it and contribute. Then have one distro that's "headless"
>> > with the option of using whatever console one wanted, including quick
>> > drop in of the old console. Could even distribute a script that goes
>> > out, d/l the old console and installs it on demand as one sees fit (as
>> > james mentioned).
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On Tue, Jan 7, 2014 at 2:28 PM, Timothy Bish <tabish121@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >> On 01/06/2014 03:06 AM, Claus Ibsen wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> Hi
>> >>>
>> >>> I think the old web console should be moved into a sub-project of
>> >>> ActiveMQ.
>> >>> Other ASF projects like Felix [1], Karaf [2], etc does this with their
>> >>> web-consoles.
>> >>>
>> >>> That may also make it easier for people to contribute to the
>> >>> web-console as a sub-project if there codebase is smaller, and not
>> >>> contains the entire ActiveMQ source code. That may spark a little more
>> >>> life into the old web-console so people can help maintain it.
>> >>>
>> >>> For the standalone ActiveMQ distribution, then installing the old web
>> >>> console should be an easy step, such as unzipping a .zip file, or
>> >>> copying a .war / .jar or something to a directory, and allowing to
>> >>> editing a configuration file to configure the console (port / context
>> >>> path / or other configurations). Then other 3rd party consoles could
>> >>> have the *same* installation procedure, so there is even
>> >>> playing-field.
>> >>>
>> >>> For the embedded ActiveMQ distribution for SMX/Karaf users, its
>> >>> already easy to install the console, as its just like any other
>> >>> installation using a feature. This is the same for other 3rd party
>> >>> consoles, and thus there is already an even playing field.
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> [1] -
>> >>>
>> http://felix.apache.org/documentation/subprojects/apache-felix-web-console.html
>> >>> [2] - http://karaf.apache.org/index/subprojects/webconsole.html
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 10:59 AM, Robert Davies <rajdavies@gmail.com>
>> >>> wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>> The old/original console is no longer fit for purpose, it is hard
to
>> >>>> maintain, the source of a lot of security issues [1] over the last
few
>> >>>> years.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> There is another thread about using hawtio as the console going
>> forward,
>> >>>> and without going into all the gory details it is probably likely
>> that there
>> >>>> may be no web console shipped at all in future releases of ActiveMQ.
>> The JMX
>> >>>> naming hierarchy was improved for ActiveMQ 5.8, such that its easy
to
>> view
>> >>>> the running status of an ActiveMQ broker from 3rd party tools such
as
>> >>>> jconsole, visualvm or hawtio. Regardless of the outcome of the other
>> >>>> discussion [2] - It doesn’t help the ActiveMQ project to try and
>> maintain a
>> >>>> static web console any more.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> I propose we remove the old web console from the ActiveMQ 5.10
>> release -
>> >>>> thoughts ?
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> [1]
>> >>>>
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AMQ-2714?jql=project%20%3D%20AMQ%20AND%20text%20~%20%22XSS%22
>> >>>> [2]
>> >>>>
>> http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/Default-Web-Console-td4675705.html
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Rob Davies
>> >>>> ————————
>> >>>> Red Hat, Inc
>> >>>> http://hawt.io - #dontcha
>> >>>> Twitter: rajdavies
>> >>>> Blog: http://rajdavies.blogspot.com
>> >>>> ActiveMQ in Action: http://www.manning.com/snyder/
>> >>>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >> +1
>> >>
>> >> The old console has been a continuous source of bugs and there's not
>> been
>> >> much community involvement in maintaining it so it'd be much better to
>> just
>> >> remove from the mainline and provide a way for those who really want to
>> >> contribute to do so without shipping out something that's not as
>> polished in
>> >> the main distribution.
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> Tim Bish
>> >> Sr Software Engineer | RedHat Inc.
>> >> tim.bish@redhat.com | www.fusesource.com | www.redhat.com
>> >> skype: tabish121 | twitter: @tabish121
>> >> blog: http://timbish.blogspot.com/
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Christian Posta
>> > http://www.christianposta.com/blog
>> > twitter: @christianposta
>>
>> Rob Davies
>> ————————
>> Red Hat, Inc
>> http://hawt.io - #dontcha
>> Twitter: rajdavies
>> Blog: http://rajdavies.blogspot.com
>> ActiveMQ in Action: http://www.manning.com/snyder/
>>
>>



-- 
Hiram Chirino

Engineering | Red Hat, Inc.

hchirino@redhat.com | fusesource.com | redhat.com

skype: hiramchirino | twitter: @hiramchirino

blog: Hiram Chirino's Bit Mojo

Mime
View raw message