activemq-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From artnaseef <...@artnaseef.com>
Subject Re: ActiveMQ Console - let's get the problem defined
Date Tue, 04 Feb 2014 15:38:59 GMT
Hadrian,

I apologize for keeping the discussion alive, even when some of the
discussion may be painful.  With that said, can we continue to discuss it,
letting go of what's done?

My hope is that we can, as a community, decide on a path forward that
meets all of the needs and opens the door to go past that.  For example,
if someone wants to come improve the webconsole, it would be good to have
clarity on what is acceptible and not acceptible for such an effort.

I see James is frustrated, as are a lot of people passionate about
ActiveMQ and Hawt.io.  I'm getting frustrated just reading the comments! 
I hope to see the frustration fade out and see it be replaced with action,
and keeping the passion for ActiveMQ alive!

-art

>
>
> James, I believe you yourself suggested in a previous mail to stop this
> conversation. I think it's the right thing to do as we now know where we
> stand.
>
> We understand that you are disappointed, we understand that the *only*
> good solution is the technology you build outside the apartheid of the
> ASF the place where one cannot innovate. You made your opinions
> abundantly clear. It just so happens that we don't share your opinions.
> You will not be convincing no matter how much you'll insist on this
> tone. Therefore my strong suggestion is to either help contribute to fix
> whatever you think is lacking with our AMQ console or just let us do it.
>
> Cheers,
> Hadrian
>
>
>
> On 01/31/2014 07:21 PM, James Strachan wrote:
>> On Friday, January 31, 2014, artnaseef <art@artnaseef.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Another thing - "22Mb legacy turd" is not a technical argument (at
>>> least, I
>>> don't recognize it as one).
>>
>> Memory usage is important to a message broker - which has to spool to
>> disk
>> as soon as it's out of RAM - which drastically affects performance. BTW
>> that 22mb turd is just the compressed disk size of the code, never mind
>> the
>> runtime overhead
>>
>>
>> I'm disappointed.
>>> If there are concerns with maintenance, what are they?
>>
>>
>> No one wants to maintain it for one; it's been dormant for years; plus
>> it's
>> kinda crappy.
>>
>> Second there's a much better solution now. Though It'll probably annoy
>> you
>> if I mention it out loud.
>>
>> Third, jolokia is probably enough these days for runtime sevices (nice,
>> lean REST/JSON API to the mbeans). Any devops can knock
>> themselves out with any script/tool/web page with that.
>>
>> BTW before the Savoir/Talend zealots jump in with further conspiracy
>> theories; jolokia isn't a Fuse/Red Hat project at all, we've no
>> committers.
>> It's just a great, lean solution to the management issue.
>>
>>
>>   I believe there are
>>> currently only 3 outstanding Jira entries for the console.
>>
>> Look closer. But to be honest the code's been neglected with little
>> community for so long, folks probably stopped raising anything but bugs
>> &
>> security issues many years ago
>>
>>
>>
>>> Right?  It's old
>>> - so what, it's not older than ActiveMQ ;-).
>>
>> It's not far off really - but key pieces of ActiveMQ get rewritten &
>> improved all the time (eg level db). The web console is the same old
>> crap
>> it's always been. I wrote quite a bit of it many years ago; I apologise
>> for
>> it profusely-  but it still deserves a sympathetic burial.
>>
>> Maybe struts 1.0 is up for a comeback too?
>>
>>
>> I love that so many people are passionate about ActiveMQ.
>>
>>
>> Me too!
>>
>>
>>
>>> I wish that
>>> passion were being put into making it better and moving it forward
>>
>> Didn't you spot that quite a few of us have been putting our passion
>> into a
>> new amazing console for ActiveMQ, based on modern lightweight
>> technology - that's
>> not 21Mb of compressed turd?  Or do you just discount all open source
>> projects without an Apache PMC in principle without even looking?
>>
>>
>>
>>> rather
>>> than making arguments without merit and laying out criticism - very
>>> disappointing.
>>
>> I'm disappointed you're disappointed
>>
>>
>>
>>> So, back to defining the problem.  All I've seen so far is the list of
>>> security concerns from Hiram - thank you Hiram.  Anything else?  I do
>>> believe I've read comments about difficulty maintaining it.  Is that
>>> true,
>>> or just an exaggerated expression of frustration?
>>
>> When code is dying and losing its utility & before it's buried in the
>> Attic, the compassionate thing to do is see if it can survive without
>> life
>> support. Moving it to a sub project seems the right thing to do. If you
>> can
>> attract a community around it - great, fair play to you. If not, the
>> attic
>> is ok too (most code will end up there one day, it's just a question of
>> time).
>>
>> Apache is all about communty and right now I don't see any around the
>> old web console code. Moving it to a sub project will settle the
>> argument
>> once and for all in a fair, Apache Way. Whatever the outcome, the
>> community
>> wins
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> View this message in context:
>>> http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/ActiveMQ-Console-let-s-get-the-problem-defined-tp4677105p4677224.html
>>> Sent from the ActiveMQ - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion
> below:
> http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/ActiveMQ-Console-let-s-get-the-problem-defined-tp4677105p4677404.html
> To start a new topic under ActiveMQ - Dev, email
> ml-node+s2283324n2368404h72@n4.nabble.com
> To unsubscribe from ActiveMQ Console - let's get the problem defined,
> visit
> http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/template/NamlServlet.jtp?macro=unsubscribe_by_code&node=4677105&code=YXJ0QGFydG5hc2VlZi5jb218NDY3NzEwNXwtMjA1NDcyNjY5MQ==





--
View this message in context: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/ActiveMQ-Console-let-s-get-the-problem-defined-tp4677105p4677406.html
Sent from the ActiveMQ - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message