directory-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Ersin Er" <>
Subject Re: Web Based Control; OpenDS Control Center
Date Mon, 04 Jun 2007 17:11:47 GMT
On 6/4/07, Chris Custine <> wrote:
> On 6/4/07, Alex Karasulu <> wrote:
> > Hi Chris,
> >
> >
> > On 6/3/07, Chris Custine <> wrote:
> > > I have been thinking about a web based admin app for quite some time as
> well...  I think maybe we are even talking about 2 different things here
> (basic internal admin app and larger enterprise admin app).  I have even
> gotten to the point of thinking that the basic embedded Jetty app that you
> are already discussing should be part of the OSS project, but maybe a larger
> Enterprise app is a seperate thing altogether, almost like Studio (maybe
> Studio Web).
> >
> >
> > Yes this is certainly a possibility.  Let's not close the door on this but
> I do not think such a
> > large application should be hosted directly on the ApacheDS server's Jetty
> service.  Perhaps
> > The hooks could be placed on the ApacheDS instance via web services or
> some other
> > management interface like LDAP or JMX.  Then this studio web app could be
> an application
> > deployed on a standalone web server.
> >
> >
> > > I think we are obviously occupied with many other more important things
> at the moment, but I can tell you that my experience with client preference
> has been the opposite of yours.  My larger clients would count a web based
> admin app as a postitive feature, and an installed GUI as a negative in
> product assesment.  This is mainly due to the strict deployment and
> evaluation policies for desktop applications since neither of them allow
> direct install of software and require automated software push for inventory
> and license control, even for niche admin apps like this.
> >
> >
> > You're totally right Chris.  Big companies lock down desktops but do they
> do it for those
> > select few power users like administrators that will be the ones using the
> studio application.
> >
> > My reason for not thinking too highly of using a web based administration
> application
> > stems from this fact.  Of the population of employees in the company a
> very small fraction
> > of power users (administrators) will be using this application.  From my
> understanding
> > one of the main strengths of a web based application is in providing
> access to a large
> > population of users without having to deploy it on their desktops along
> with centralized
> > administration and maintenance.  Here we're going to only have a small
> population of users
> > and hence I feel a web application might be overkill.
> >
> > There might be another slightly larger population of non-administrator
> type users like
> > developers which may use Studio to develop schema or stored procedures.
> Most companies
> > now use Eclipse for development.  Studio as an eclipse tool can be added
> to an existing
> > Eclipse installation as a set of plugins without requiring the need for
> such approvals to install
> > new applications.  Meaning the plugin update process in eclipse will not
> require the developer
> > to request the installation of a new application on their workstation.
> >
> > But I do agree some organizations will still insist on having a web based
> platform for this.  This
> > is why I'm not abandoning the idea but for me it is merely a matter of
> prioritization.  I think we
> > can get by with an Eclipse RCP application for a while.  Having a web
> based Studio will be
> > a great thing to have but not required.
> >
> > I think SUN is writing a OpenDS web application because they're stinkers
> when it comes to
> > using Eclipse.  This is one of the reasons why they chose a web based
> administration console
> > since they X'd the option to use eclipse.
> >
> > Also note that building a Web application verses a fat client is a bit
> more involved.
> >
> >    (1) server apps must run forever and leaks can add up whereas client
> apps are restarted
> >    (2) lots more moving parts in a webapp
> >    (3) webapp dev is less agile than fat client development
> >
> > I think if we mature the RCP based Studio fat client rapidly through user
> input and solidify the
> > feature that are deemed the most useful then we have a great set of
> requirements already
> > in hand for building the web based studio application.  Knocking it out
> then will be much easier
> > since the requirements are clear and all we need to do is apply some
> mechanics to whip it
> > together.
> >
> >
> > > Anyway, this is a complicated discussion, but at some point I would like
> to re-visit this when we can give it more time.  I have a long list of
> features that I have been building in my head, so maybe at some point we can
> document some ideas and evaluate it from there?
> >
> >
> > Sounds good and I hope you don't think I am shooting down your idea.  I do
> think it is a good one but it just comes down to prioritization, time to
> market (can't believe I just used this term on an OS mailing list :) ), and
> the impact that will result.  I do want to do it though but the when and the
> how is what I am concerned with.
> No, I know you aren't shutting it down.  I also think that some of the
> features I am thinking about are crossing over into the IDM realm anyway
> (delegated user management, custom user friendly screens, etc.), so thats
> why I think it is a pretty big discussion.  I just didn't want to leave
> Ersin stranded on his first email since I had some similar ideas.
>  Some day....  :-)

Hey Chris, thanks :-)

BTW, A administrator may not always have a Studio close to him but a
web ui will always work, at least for some task.

And again BTW, I don't want to be seen as against Studio. I am a great
fan of it since the first day I met ;-)

> Chris
> >
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Alex
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >

Ersin Er

R.A. and Ph.D Student at the Dept. of Computer Eng. in Hacettepe University

Committer and PMC Member of The Apache Directory Project

View raw message