From dev-return-65335-archive-asf-public=cust-asf.ponee.io@activemq.apache.org Thu Apr 26 20:37:21 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: archive-asf-public@cust-asf.ponee.io Delivered-To: archive-asf-public@cust-asf.ponee.io Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by mx-eu-01.ponee.io (Postfix) with SMTP id B6EF4180648 for ; Thu, 26 Apr 2018 20:37:20 +0200 (CEST) Received: (qmail 96035 invoked by uid 500); 26 Apr 2018 18:37:19 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@activemq.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@activemq.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@activemq.apache.org Received: (qmail 96016 invoked by uid 99); 26 Apr 2018 18:37:19 -0000 Received: from pnap-us-west-generic-nat.apache.org (HELO spamd2-us-west.apache.org) (209.188.14.142) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 26 Apr 2018 18:37:19 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spamd2-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at spamd2-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTP id 8801C1A26D8 for ; Thu, 26 Apr 2018 18:37:18 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at spamd2-us-west.apache.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.101 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.101 tagged_above=-999 required=6.31 tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=disabled Authentication-Results: spamd2-us-west.apache.org (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mx1-lw-us.apache.org ([10.40.0.8]) by localhost (spamd2-us-west.apache.org [10.40.0.9]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id IrEgaxs9hQTz for ; Thu, 26 Apr 2018 18:37:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-yw0-f174.google.com (mail-yw0-f174.google.com [209.85.161.174]) by mx1-lw-us.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mx1-lw-us.apache.org) with ESMTPS id AAF1D5F11F for ; Thu, 26 Apr 2018 18:37:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-yw0-f174.google.com with SMTP id v132-v6so2893865ywc.6 for ; Thu, 26 Apr 2018 11:37:16 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=IUyHfuJS1JvsDa1ZOf2PLtH8kTnzkBZxbBZkQSYdcYg=; b=ANApv5vw8Bz0N4CEBOn1a1QKO0ZaG4sKOdY7vGXghwaO7drIAycwuADHKRx2RB8e08 9SJfNrdonrUBkj1bYuN/DkfDvnUiDJkMRBW5QxrwBeSDalW1wK0iuuin8SCwmMUV6E/7 bZ7QjgfqtIlSQE1+K3JfC5rMcsaJWbiGVcLjDNigygGTjmJFOJMJOCPFI4V1Or4E0aFT lGnxwYcqlAFFM5cMxHAo3DMncdWLZs4VXzA/5b7H7ofKYSGdqokcR+ji8yJ5OP7ibHmS J2bIYSt64+KE0uarwnw9q8BzgyzarOWEjJSDZ/6/XNVz9r/Ib2j0u6XjjSRzII5z3RiT hheA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=IUyHfuJS1JvsDa1ZOf2PLtH8kTnzkBZxbBZkQSYdcYg=; b=qMXDFWrwCZiucUPgrG0cHwMAcCqOe4Mnk+hk8cQCX3SGZ8dU9FQtxUyLPILbRyItsB Dol51Uk+94pmoV+dt482pRU9CgSdXiI4gMRL6XOijOl+I7k61mYZ4HQCDmtMcD8F1c2X WweUyNzSMJxtecI0d0C145WiOsjtjHah66vuets+K00T3x7xT+4NTDgdKJWA8xt1LrQb VEvg2rqjF/sinC1W7pQaRhXNDsIEOGbaim3RVaHpofAuJY2YzTPeCjPUszpUT+l1fbso SmtE76hyyGLd1fvft4DCrBZ6uSmyDQm7wm2LO/31HIqJYKW/PaBEF9O4GDdg2r1zfWln +Ciw== X-Gm-Message-State: ALQs6tBkEo6U+iLAuqCEi6Cn3znAox97vW1q5xPnzdNhHMahUSNhVIpc eJXDbwTkJWxIj8X5CGQ/+xFc4Y7p/mahlkfe0SnwEQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AIpwx49IOZ5i6vFt1PSbjMTpRsD1Vom9JPULF8oXd4zblt1OIhKuevjlB3KXA1nRVAwW3PbERSFYCg1i6ubZQzJUTLs= X-Received: by 2002:a81:8a42:: with SMTP id a63-v6mr18379324ywg.293.1524767835949; Thu, 26 Apr 2018 11:37:15 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 2002:a25:af14:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Thu, 26 Apr 2018 11:36:45 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: From: Christopher Shannon Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2018 14:36:45 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Webconsole deprecation To: dev@activemq.apache.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Art, I think my main concern was stated in my first email and Justin re-iterated everything and is spot on. The webconsole is just simply not maintained anymore which is why I proposed deprecating it. Chris On Thu, Apr 26, 2018 at 2:27 PM, Clebert Suconic wrote: > This is not about opinions.. it's a fact.. people either fix it.. .or > deprecate it! Simple! > > > If no one is fixing it.. it will be deprecated.. I don't think this > even requires a voting as this is based in facts.. not opinions. > > On Thu, Apr 26, 2018 at 1:30 PM, Arthur Naseef wrote: >> Hey Chris - I looked for you in the IRC channel but didn't see you (sorry >> if I missed you). >> >> I'd like to understand the concerns and talk to you about addressing them. >> >> Can you either enumerate the big concerns here, or give me a shout? IRC or >> email work. >> >> Art >> >> >> On Thu, Apr 26, 2018 at 10:28 AM, Christopher Shannon < >> christopher.l.shannon@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Paul, >>> >>> Yes it is mostly a people problem but that doesn't make it any less of >>> a problem. It's still a big problem. Apache is a volunteer >>> organization. You can't make anyone support something they don't want >>> to. The reality is that no one wants to maintain it, there's been >>> several years of evidence to prove that. >>> >>> I would rather deprecate something and make it known it's not >>> maintained so at least people are aware of the risks involved with >>> using unmaintained software versus leaving things status quo and >>> pretending everything is fine when it isn't. >>> >>> On Thu, Apr 26, 2018 at 1:19 PM, Paul Gale wrote: >>> > If the definition of 'the problem' is that no committers are willing to >>> > maintain the web console then that's an internal leadership problem of >>> the >>> > group. Please don't try to 'fix' that by making it a problem for end >>> users >>> > by deprecating/removing it. Why not address the problem of lack of >>> interest >>> > from a leadership perspective? >>> > >>> > So, if at any time in the future some popular feature/component of >>> ActiveMQ >>> > stops being maintained owing to lack of interest by committers, should >>> that >>> > necessarily qualify it to become deprecated/removed? I don't think so. As >>> > an end user with hundreds of deployed instances of ActiveMQ in Production >>> > it would be very annoying if the web console were to be deprecated. Let's >>> > face it when someone wants it to be 'deprecated' they just want to move >>> it >>> > one step closer to be being 'removed.' As an end user we've been screwed >>> > over a few times in the past with such decisions were made on a whim >>> > because something was convenient for committers; changing the use of >>> > activemq-all.jar springs to mind - that was big for us. Each time these >>> > incidents happen it only illustrates further that some committers are out >>> > of touch with the user base, or perhaps they're not but have a different >>> > agenda. >>> > >>> > AFAIK there doesn't appear to be a technical impediment for supporting >>> the >>> > web console, rather it seems to be a political one. It's a people >>> problem. >>> > >>> > >>> > Thanks, >>> > Paul >>> > >>> > On Thu, Apr 26, 2018 at 12:52 PM, Justin Bertram >>> > wrote: >>> > >>> >> > What changed since last opening this question? >>> >> >>> >> My understanding (based on Chris' email) is that nothing has changed >>> since >>> >> the last discussion, and that is precisely the problem. >>> >> >>> >> > What problems are being solved by removing it? >>> >> >>> >> I believe Chris is proposing that it be deprecated and disabled by >>> default >>> >> rather than removed. The problem solved by this is ostensibly that users >>> >> would understand it is no longer maintained (i.e. de facto truth) and >>> that >>> >> there are risks associated with enabling it. >>> >> >>> >> > How will the important functions provided by the WebConsole be >>> provided >>> >> to end-users? >>> >> >>> >> Wouldn't users who want the functions provided by the web console could >>> >> still have them by enabling it (assuming they're willing to take the >>> >> associated risks)? >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> Justin >>> >> >>> >> On Thu, Apr 26, 2018 at 11:40 AM, Arthur Naseef wrote: >>> >> >>> >> > The ActiveMQ WebConsole fills a very important role in the solution. >>> >> > >>> >> > So here are the questions coming to mind when reading the request for >>> >> > deprecation: >>> >> > >>> >> > 1. What changed since last opening this question? >>> >> > 2. What problems are being solved by removing it? >>> >> > 3. How will the important functions provided by the WebConsole be >>> >> > provided to end-users? >>> >> > >>> >> > Here are some of the important functions: >>> >> > >>> >> > - Quick view of broker status after initial installation of broker, >>> >> > helpful for new installations and for those learning to use the >>> broker >>> >> > for >>> >> > the first time. >>> >> > - Greatly reduces time to get started using the broker >>> effectively >>> >> > - Zero configuration, out-of-the-box Management Console >>> >> > - Access to critical broker details, including: >>> >> > - memory and store usage >>> >> > - listing of queues and topics >>> >> > - viewing connections to the broker >>> >> > - viewing NOB connections >>> >> > - Handy test utilities >>> >> > - Browse queue contents >>> >> > - Send messages >>> >> > - Easy to instruct users on it's use to obtain important details >>> when >>> >> > providing remote support >>> >> > >>> >> > It would be great to have a meaningful discussion that moves us >>> forward. >>> >> > Right now, this feels to me like a simple re-hash of the old >>> discussion. >>> >> > >>> >> > Art >>> >> > >>> >> > >>> >> > On Thu, Apr 26, 2018 at 7:33 AM, Christopher Shannon < >>> >> > christopher.l.shannon@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >> > >>> >> > > I think it's time to have the yearly web console deprecation or >>> >> > > removal conversation. >>> >> > > >>> >> > > I realize this conversation has been had multiple times in the past >>> >> > > already. However, since those conversations have taken place there >>> >> > > has still been no effort by anyone to maintain the webconsole for >>> >> > > several years. There continues to be reported bugs against the web >>> >> > > console in jira and they are ignored. People also submit PRs to >>> >> > > improve the webconsole and they are ignored. >>> >> > > >>> >> > > In the past there has been a lot of pushback against outright >>> removal >>> >> > > of the webconsole because there are people who find it useful. I >>> >> > > think that is fair so maybe a better approach would be to go the >>> >> > > LevelDB route. >>> >> > > >>> >> > > Perhaps we could just make a note on the website that it is not >>> >> > > maintained anymore and is deprecated (and also disable it by >>> default) >>> >> > > but still include it so users have the option to turn it on if they >>> >> > > want? >>> >> > > >>> >> > >>> >> >>> > > > > -- > Clebert Suconic