activemq-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Gary Tully <gary.tu...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [POLL] - Remove the old ActiveMQ Console
Date Tue, 21 Jan 2014 22:16:45 GMT
inline

On 21 January 2014 17:36, Daniel Kulp <dkulp@apache.org> wrote:
>
> On Jan 21, 2014, at 12:07 PM, Gary Tully <gary.tully@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On 21 January 2014 16:30, Daniel Kulp <dkulp@apache.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> 2) All the ActiveMQ related code needs to be moved into the ActiveMQ project.
  If someone is using ActiveMQ and wants to contribute changes to how the console looks or
displays items or such, they should be making contributions to ActiveMQ, not some external
community (open source, free, or otherwise).   The hawt.io “framework” of libraries and
such can remain outside, but the ActiveMQ specific portions needs to be part of this community.
  If it’s going to be the visible frontend of this project, we need to make sure it drives
the developer willing to contribute enhancements into ActiveMQ.
>>>
>> This is putting the cart before the horse!
>> If we need some changes and if we can't make contributions to hawtio
>> (patches, issues etc) we can deal with that by building our own plugin
>> or throwing it out or whatever. But why do that now?
>
> You are basically asking THIS developer community to completely give up control over
how ActiveMQ is presented to the users to a different community.   I personally cannot think
of anything much worse for this community than that.   That seems like a horrible idea from
an Apache community standpoint.
>
That is not what I am asking.
How can choosing to adopt a better solution to an open problem be
giving up control? We can always change our minds and throw it out if
it does not serve our needs. The PMC will always be in control of what
is released.


> The goals of the Apache communities needs to be to make sure developers are driven into
the Apache communities, not another community.
Any goal that hopes to drive developers is a non starter. Developers
choose, they are not driven. I am suggesting we make a sensible choice
that helps our community by giving it a better web ui. hawtio wants to
have the best activemq web console, we want to ship the best activemq
console. The stars are aligned. If the alignment falters we address
that.

>
>> We don't have to own everything that makes activemq better and that
>> makes our users experience better, we just have to ensure that it is
>> better.
>
> Making the user experience better is certainly an important aspect of the Apache communities,
but the primary focus should be on making sure the developer community is healthy and we aren’t
driving potential developers elsewhere.   That NEEDS to be the most important thing at this
point, especially with the current active makeup of this community.
>
> In particular, since Apache is a 503b charitable non-profit foundation, we cannot be
used to promote other communities, particularly those “owned” by a for-profit entity.
 (open source or otherwise, that’s somewhat irrelevant)
>
> Anyway, as far as *I’m* concerned (but I’m not a member of this PMC, just an interested
party), if the hawt.io community is unwilling or unable to support the ActiveMQ community
to allow ActiveMQ to maintain control over it’s user experience, then there is no-point
engaging with them.  It is a waste of time.
>
> That said, if hawt.io community want to create a full distribution of ActiveMQ + hawt.io
to make life easier for users, they certainly are welcome to do so as long as it’s not branded
ActiveMQ.  (and again, not something to be promoted here)
>
> Dan
>
>
>> If the hawt.io  community is unwilling (or unable) to do the second part, then, IMO,
#3 is a non-starter.  If they ARE willing to do that, then great.   Lets start figuring out
how to get that done.   But that’s something that would  need to be discussed on their side
first.
>>>
>>>
>>> Dan
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Jan 21, 2014, at 10:55 AM, Gary Tully <gary.tully@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> There are a lot of 0s and +1s for option [3] and two -1s
>>>>
>>>> Let me make a case for it to try and get consensus around it.
>>>>
>>>> I want to 'replace' the existing web console with something better.
>>>> For configuration activemq did not build a dependency injection
>>>> framework, we shipped spring.
>>>> Learning from that, it does not make sense to me that we build and
>>>> maintain a html5 web console.
>>>>
>>>> An admin/management web front end based over our extensive JMX api
>>>> sounds perfect but it needs
>>>> a community to evolve and improve it. We (activemq committers) have
>>>> proven that we need help in that area.
>>>>
>>>> Anyone what to change their vote or further expand on the technical
>>>> reasons we should not be branding hatwio?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 17 January 2014 13:33, Robert Davies <rajdavies@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> I want to take a straw poll to see where everyone stands, because opinion
has varied, mine included. Straw polls can be a useful tool to move towards consensus. This
isn’t a formal vote, but to reduce the noise, can we keep it to binding votes only ?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> 1. Have one distribution with no default console, but make it easy to
deploy a console on demand (the original console - or 3rd party ones).
>>>>> 2. Have two separate distributions, one with no console  - and have a
second distribution with the original console
>>>>> 3. One distribution, with hawtio as the console -  ActiveMQ branded.
>>>>> 4. One distribution, but uses the original ActiveMQ console only.
>>>>>
>>>>> Here’s my vote:
>>>>>
>>>>> [1]. +1
>>>>> [2]  0
>>>>> [3] 0
>>>>> [4] -1
>>>>>
>>>>> thanks,
>>>>>
>>>>> Rob
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> http://redhat.com
>>>> http://blog.garytully.com
>>>
>>> --
>>> Daniel Kulp
>>> dkulp@apache.org - http://dankulp.com/blog
>>> Talend Community Coder - http://coders.talend.com
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> http://redhat.com
>> http://blog.garytully.com
>
> --
> Daniel Kulp
> dkulp@apache.org - http://dankulp.com/blog
> Talend Community Coder - http://coders.talend.com
>



-- 
http://redhat.com
http://blog.garytully.com

Mime
View raw message