On 25 Jan 2014, at 15:24, Hadrian Zbarcea <[email protected]> wrote:
> Rob, isn't this the same as your proposal #1? We already have the answer on > that. Why start another discussion? I think its more a variation on #2? > > Your proposal is actually two proposals. > > 1. Move the console to a separate subproject. > 2. Release it independently. > > On the 1st part my understanding is that opinions varied from 0 to +1. On the > 2nd part I think it's clear that some, myself included, want the console to > remain part of the ActiveMQ official distro. Agreed - nobody thought it was a bad idea at least - think we could just go ahead and make it a sub-project. > > What I understand is that your desire is to remove the console from the > ActiveMQ distro in whatever way possible. Please clarify your proposal. I’m just trying to find a compromise. There’s a lot of the developers who don’t want to maintain the web console. If ActiveMQ and the Web console are separate projects - the users who want a release with a bundled web console will take the distribution with it embedded. The reason for splitting out the web console is to allow for work on the console to happen at a different rate to ActiveMQ releases. This will allow a community to grow around it and move it forward, whilst not waiting for broker releases - or driving an artificial broker release just to get the web console out. > > Cheers, > Hadrian > > > > On 01/25/2014 04:23 AM, Robert Davies wrote: >> The recent poll [1] and discussions [2] around what to do with the current >> ActiveMQ web console demonstrated there’s a mix bag of views. There are >> developers who passionately believe that the current Web Console is a large >> technical debt on the project, hasn’t been actively developed for years and >> is a security risk - whilst others believe it benefits users immensely to >> have such a web console available. >> >> What I would like to propose is that the Web Console is moved to a sub >> project of ActiveMQ - where those interested in maintaining and developing >> it can work independently of the ActiveMQ broker release. Ideally there >> would be collaboration - so that the Web console could be released in the >> same time frame as every new minor and major release of the broker. However, >> having it as a sub project will also allow for it to be released >> independently - so that if folks want to iterate releases of the web console >> whilst they improve it or to fix issues as they arise they can. It also has >> the benefit of freeing up ActiveMQ developers who want to concentrate on the >> core broker functionality. >> >> This is a compromise, but I believe its the best way forward. What do you >> guys think ? >> >> thanks, >> >> Rob >> >> [1] https://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg37711.html >> [2] >> http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/DISCUSS-Remove-the-old-ActiveMQ-Console-td4675925.html >> >> Rob Davies >> ———————— >> Red Hat, Inc >> http://hawt.io - #dontcha >> Twitter: rajdavies >> Blog: http://rajdavies.blogspot.com >> ActiveMQ in Action: http://www.manning.com/snyder/ >> >> > Rob Davies ———————— Red Hat, Inc http://hawt.io - #dontcha Twitter: rajdavies Blog: http://rajdavies.blogspot.com ActiveMQ in Action: http://www.manning.com/snyder/
