activemq-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Clebert Suconic <clebert.suco...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Removing the Web Console
Date Fri, 07 Oct 2016 22:29:34 GMT
On Fri, Oct 7, 2016 at 5:40 PM, Jim Gomes <jgomes@apache.org> wrote:
> I was under the impression that all Apache development discussions occur on
> the email list.

As Justin Bertram Said, all PR comments are sent to the dev-list.

What I'm really proposing, it's to be practical... to have something
concrete to talk about on top of the code.



 Clebert Suconic <clebert.suconic@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> I think this is pretty straightforward:
>>
>> i - it should relay on JMX or jolokia.. A common thing between both
>> Artemis and ActiveMQ
>>
>> ii - it should manage at least a single broker.. with some metrics...
>>
>>
>> iii - anything beyond that will just be a collaboration over the code.
>>
>>
>> The best way to discuss this IMO would be through a Pull Request..
>> someone send an initial draft.. we can have some **technical**
>> discussion over of PR, and commit it as version 1... then
>> collaboratively this could be increased just as with anything else.
>>
>>
>>
>> I think we are clear from the previous discussions... and that's a
>> request I am making here, probably the third time... lets CTRL-Alt-Del
>> and start fresh... The issues we had are clear... and I see everybody
>> with a single goal here.. to have an integrated console that looks
>> like an Apache project, pretty and neat.
>>
>>
>> Once someone put a first version, we can only improve it from there.
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 7, 2016 at 12:17 PM, Hadrian Zbarcea <hzbarcea@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > I would suggest discussing the goals for such a console first. Is it
>> > intended to monitory just one broker instance or a whole network of
>> brokers?
>> > Should it manage just the brokers or other services? Should it rely on
>> JMX
>> > or something else?
>> >
>> > Then one can think about reusing and/or improving something that's
>> available
>> > or some other solution.
>> >
>> > The way this discuss goes, sounds to me like trying to push again for
>> > something that was rejected in the past and I suspect will not go
>> anywhere.
>> >
>> > My $0.02,
>> > Hadrian
>> >
>> >
>> > On 10/07/2016 06:41 AM, Martyn Taylor wrote:
>> >>
>> >> +1 on improving/adding a console.  Providing a console out of the box
>> is a
>> >> massive win for user experience imo and something that I feel Artemis
>> >> would
>> >> greatly benefit from.  Whether it's HawtIO or something else we should
>> >> make
>> >> every effort to standardise across both 5.x and Artemis.
>> >>
>> >> On Tue, Oct 4, 2016 at 5:11 PM, Clebert Suconic
>> >> <clebert.suconic@gmail.com>
>> >> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> On Tue, Oct 4, 2016 at 11:57 AM, John D. Ament <johndament@apache.org>
>> >>> wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>> @Hiram
>> >>>>
>> >>>> The website branding says otherwise (take a look at the top right
>> >>>
>> >>> corner).
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> That symbol on the top is just a link to the following:
>> >>>
>> >>> "Like hawtio? It’s part of a community of Red Hat projects. Learn
more
>> >>> about Red Hat and our open source communities:"
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>  No other implications from what I see.
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Clebert Suconic
>>



-- 
Clebert Suconic

Mime
View raw message