activemq-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Claus Ibsen <claus.ib...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: ActiveMQ Console - let's get the problem defined
Date Tue, 04 Feb 2014 14:19:04 GMT
On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 8:51 PM, artnaseef <art@artnaseef.com> wrote:
> This discussion is regarding amq and the webconsole. The state of hawt.io really has
no bearing on the discussion as it is not part of amq.
>
> There are solid reasons amq needs a console.
>
> Please leave hawt.io out of the discussion.
>

Arthur was it not YOU who wanted to keep this thread only about the
original AMQ web console.
Maybe you can start with yourself.


> Sent from my iPhone
>
>> On Jan 31, 2014, at 12:00 PM, "James Strachan-2 [via ActiveMQ]" <ml-node+s2283324n4677218h6@n4.nabble.com>
wrote:
>>
>> LOL. Nice try James.
>>
>> Check out the current plugins for hawtio:
>> http://hawt.io/plugins/index.html
>>
>> we've worked pretty well with every version of pretty much every decent
>> open source software library from camel / cxf / activemq / karaf / tomcat /
>> jetty / osgi / git / fabric8 / osgi / jmx / quartz - by being a stand alone
>> separate project. And the hawtio ActiveMQ tooling is way beyond anything in
>> the old console. Open source projects can actually, you know, collaborate.
>>
>> There's really no technical reason to force a 22Mb legacy turd into the
>> ActiveMQ broker project or distro.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 31 January 2014 18:41, James Carman <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> > Right, but you were at the mercy of what was currently exposed.
>> > Adding new functionality would involve instrumenting it in the MBeans
>> > (if it's not already there of course).  That's the key reason they
>> > shouldn't be separated.
>> >
>> > On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 1:32 PM, Robin Kåveland Hansen <[hidden email]>
>> > wrote:
>> > > I will try write up some thoughts on this later, but I have a pretty
>> > strong
>> > > opinion that the responsibility of the broker is only to offer an API
>> > that
>> > > a web console may use. At my current client we wrote a web console using
>> > > the jmx api. This lets us use a different JVM for the webapp, minimising
>> > > the risk that an error in it will affect the service of the most critical
>> > > piece of infrastructure on our platform. It also lets us monitor and work
>> > > on messages on brokers that are not in a network from the same webapp.
I
>> > > don't know what things are like now, but this was difficult back in 5.5.
>> > >
>> > > If this is interesting to people I can probably share a lot of thoughts
>> > and
>> > > ideas about the web console.
>> > > On Jan 31, 2014 6:14 PM, "Hiram Chirino" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> > >
>> > >> The core ActiveMQ is all about message passing.  The skill set needed
>> > >> for that is a bit different than the one need to design and build
>> > >> beautiful, modern web applications.  Perhaps folks have just been
>> > >> focused in areas where they feel they can contribute best to.
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >> On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 8:56 AM, James Carman
>> > >> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> > >> > Out of curiosity, why did work stop on the old console?  Did folks
>> > >> > just lose interest?  Why was it neglected?
>> > >> >
>> > >> > On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 7:52 AM, Hiram Chirino <
>> > [hidden email]>
>> > >> wrote:
>> > >> >> As far as why the old console is a headache take a peek at
the CVE
>> > >> >> reported against ActiveMQ in the past.  Notice most deal with
the old
>> > >> >> console:
>> > >> >>
>> > >> >>
>> > >>
>> > http://www.cvedetails.com/vulnerability-list/vendor_id-45/product_id-19047/Apache-Activemq.html
>> > >> >>
>> > >> >> It's also lacking a modern a responsive look /w automatic
status
>> > >> >> refreshing that most modern web apps are implementing today.
>> > >> >>
>> > >> >>
>> > >> >> On Thu, Jan 30, 2014 at 5:16 PM, artnaseef <[hidden email]>
>> > wrote:
>> > >> >>> Reading through the arguments for and against removal
of the current
>> > >> console,
>> > >> >>> or moving it to a subproject, is getting confusing.  Positions
are
>> > >> hard to
>> > >> >>> understand, and options unclear.
>> > >> >>>
>> > >> >>> I propose getting the problem clearly and concisely defined,
then
>> > >> discuss
>> > >> >>> the merits of each position, and then go back to proposing
>> > solutions.
>> > >> >>>
>> > >> >>> So, what are the problems?
>> > >> >>>
>> > >> >>>
>> > >> >>>
>> > >> >>>
>> > >> >>> --
>> > >> >>> View this message in context:
>> > >>
>> > http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/ActiveMQ-Console-let-s-get-the-problem-defined-tp4677105.html
>> > >> >>> Sent from the ActiveMQ - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>> > >> >>
>> > >> >>
>> > >> >>
>> > >> >> --
>> > >> >> Hiram Chirino
>> > >> >> Engineering | Red Hat, Inc.
>> > >> >> [hidden email] | fusesource.com | redhat.com
>> > >> >> skype: hiramchirino | twitter: @hiramchirino
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >> --
>> > >> Hiram Chirino
>> > >> Engineering | Red Hat, Inc.
>> > >> [hidden email] | fusesource.com | redhat.com
>> > >> skype: hiramchirino | twitter: @hiramchirino
>> > >>
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> James
>> -------
>> Red Hat
>>
>> Email: [hidden email]
>> Web: http://fusesource.com
>> Twitter: jstrachan, fusenews
>> Blog: http://macstrac.blogspot.com/
>>
>> Open Source Integration
>>
>>
>> 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-tp4677105p4677218.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, click here.
>> NAML
>
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/ActiveMQ-Console-let-s-get-the-problem-defined-tp4677105p4677221.html
> Sent from the ActiveMQ - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.



-- 
Claus Ibsen
-----------------
Red Hat, Inc.
Email: cibsen@redhat.com
Twitter: davsclaus
Blog: http://davsclaus.com
Author of Camel in Action: http://www.manning.com/ibsen
Make your Camel applications look hawt, try: http://hawt.io

Mime
View raw message