activemq-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Clebert Suconic <>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Removing the Web Console
Date Fri, 30 Sep 2016 18:31:00 GMT
That's nice.. so I guess we could now reboot the conversation around
hawtIO/webconsole... lets forget the past. and do it from scratch

My feeling around this was.... it's a pandora box.. don't touch it..
@jgenender used that same word here on this thread.

so... IMO, the Web console needs to look an apache product..
regardless of what components you use. if someone can provide a clean
and nice implementation.. using whatever frameworks or components that
are apache (or compatible) license, I think that's a reasonable

And with git / github, we can first propose how it will look like, and
merge when it's pretty and ready. That's also a difference from 2 or 3
years ago when these discussions were taking place, where even if git
was being used the workflow was pretty much the same svn style.

I won't be able myself to work on this for a few weeks as I am working
on a few improvements around replication, that I want to do for 1.5.0.
but I think this would open the possibility of someone else looking
into that.. both from AMQ5 and/or Artemis perspective.

so if you (anyone) start working around this give us a sign here, so
there wouldn't be two people working on the same task.

A request I make is.. lets start fresh and do something cool and nice... ;)

On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 11:14 AM, jgenender <> wrote:
> clebertsuconic wrote
>> I don't want to read that discussion again.. but from what I remember
>> of what I once read, and after I talked to some guys in person, the
>> issue was where the component would live.. like the plugin being
>> outside of AMQ5 code.
>> I believe that if we consumed hawt-io as a component (just like we
>> consume Jetty), and have the plugins, checkstyles, apache branding,
>> activemq5 and Artemis brand on the main repo, it shouldn't be an
>> issue.
> I wouldn't speculate.  I wouldn't even attempt it unless you have examined
> the issues and do a 5 minute perusal on the thread.  I won't argue what it
> was because I, and some other non-Red Hat folks were central to that
> discussion.
> My recommendation... don't rehash that.  Look at the primary problems were
> (tl;dr; I mentioned them previously).  Come up with a reasonable community
> based solution to the issues and present them.
> That said, I think branding would help significantly as long as any other
> concerns are resolved.  I do know that templating it was certainly one of
> the offered solutions.
> --
> View this message in context:
> Sent from the ActiveMQ - Dev mailing list archive at

Clebert Suconic

View raw message