+1 on all counts to Chris' comments... and a -1 to moving the console
(non-binding).
I guess I just don't get why hawt.io cannot be skinned and have it become a
part of the project. It seems to me that allowing it to be skinned allows
it to not only give it the AMQ look and feel... but allows projects to adopt
it and do their own thing. Additionally, it seems to me the community would
gain from this, as does the hawt.io community themselves since other
projects can "make it theirs". Not everyone enjoys a sketchy link to a
youtube-one-hit-wonder pop song ("Dont'cha") on their console and based on
my own experience in the corporate world with AMQ, a lot of companies don't
either.
The push for hawt.io in its current format is brilliant (I mean that
facetiously). What a way to promote something, controlled in a despotic
manner (ASL or not), while also having it be the path to 3rd party marketing
and controls. That's not fair to the community. It back-doors and attempts
to manipulate what Apache is all about.
Leave the old in as an option and let folks choose what they want. Skin
hawt.io, then I would believe you would have 100% support for its use.
Nobody says that hawt.io is crap. But the way its being used and being
shoehorned as "Its ASL so its ok" is not ok. All control of its marketing
is outside the confines of Apache and _THAT_ is not fair to this community.
This community should control how it wants the console to look and hence the
look, feel, and included plugins (how convenient that JBoss is included)
should be targeted at ActiveMQ. Notice the votes of +1 seem to largely come
from committers of hawt.io who just happen to be on the PMC? Have a look at
the votes from non-PMC and non-hawt.io folks. Those just happen to be your
community.
Interestingly enough... a similar incident happened in the Geronimo group
before with some of the same usual suspects on ActiveMQ:
http://apache-geronimo.328035.n3.nabble.com/Vote-Installer-Default-Web-Container-Selection-td351425.html
Great read. PMC members who worked with the founder of Jetty (and I mean
literally worked with) wanted Jetty as the default container. The
users/community wanted Tomcat. Read the whole thread. The second to the
last posting it the nail on the head: "Hrm... odd. Most
developers/commiters picking Jetty, and most everyone looks like they want
Tomcat." Whats funny is, it ended up that Tomcat became the main container
in Geronimo after all. ;-)
Funny how history repeats itself. ;-)
Jeff
Chris Geer wrote
> At the risk of making someone unhappy I'll throw in my 2-cents from an
> user's perspective.
>
> I do see some advantage to providing official AMQ support for hawtio and
> getting rid of the current console. At the same time I also understand the
> hesitation to completely punt the console to a different project (yes I
> understand there is developer overlap and all but it's still a different
> group than the PMC). As a compromise what if the AMQ project were to do
> two
> things:
>
> 1) Bundle a skinned version of hawt.io as part of the AMQ distribution.
> 2) Fork the current hawt.io AMQ plugin and control it under the AMQ
> project
> and deploy that version instead of the default one from hawt.io.
>
> That gives the benefit of the hawt.io framework but still gives the PMC
> complete control of what is shown to the users in regards to AMQ.
> Personally I think that approach makes a lot of sense for most of the
> plugins and maybe eventually the hawt.io project can just point to the
> various projects for users to get the plugins and won't maintain them
> themselves.
>
> Chris
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 30, 2014 at 9:12 AM, Hadrian Zbarcea <
> hzbarcea@
> > wrote:
>
>> Oops, didn't realize that some of the parties are actually not on
>> private@.
>> Maybe in private then.
>>
>> Hadrian
>>
>>
>>
>> On 01/30/2014 11:11 AM, Hadrian Zbarcea wrote:
>>
>>> Rob, please stop stretching the truth. I would strongly encourage you
>>> guys if you really want to continue the discussion on this tone to do it
>>> on
>>> private@.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Hadrian
>>>
>>>
>>> On 01/30/2014 03:10 AM, Robert Davies wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Johan,
>>>>
>>>> its great to know that you are earning so much money from Apache
>>>> ActiveMQ!
>>>>
>>>> I want the best experience for the end user of ActiveMQ - and that's
>>>> it - simple. Right now that's hawtio. The old web console is frankly
>>>> well
>>>> beyond love - but I can understand from a money making point of view
>>>> you
>>>> wouldn't want to have hawtio as an option of end users. Which is why
>>>> moving
>>>> it to a sub-project will allow you and your colleagues to work on it
>>>> -
>>>> you'll probably get even more money from your customers - or you could
>>>> just
>>>> save the hard work - skin hawtio however you like (Johan's Console) -
>>>> and
>>>> make a mint yay!
>>>>
>>>> What ever happens in the community, what ever console we use, if
>>>> nobody
>>>> uses hawtio ever again, if folks went bananas and started using other
>>>> OS
>>>> solutions - I and my "Fuse" (top 10 on [1]). colleagues get payed
>>>> the
>>>> same. We don't have an interest in this for financial gain, let alone
>>>> agree
>>>> on what should happen - apart from the old web console is something we
>>>> don't want to work on - but when you've been fixing crappy bugs in for
>>>> a
>>>> while [1] - you may feel the same way.
>>>>
>>>> When you get a salary/bonus/shares regardless - it enables you to make
>>>> decisions that's best for the users - I don't think that anyone else
>>>> (your
>>>> colleagues or partner companies) who want so desperately to keep the
>>>> old
>>>> console, have the same objectivity.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Just so its all out there - hawtio is open source, is AS2 licence -
>>>> and
>>>> the community is diverse. More than one large company uses it directly
>>>> in
>>>> their products. Where hawtio lives, what direction it takes is
>>>> entirely
>>>> down to the hawtio community - my employer - Red Hat really doesn't
>>>> care -
>>>> hawtio isn't at the ASF for other reasons.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> [1] https://www.ohloh.net/p/activemq/contributors?query=&sort=commits
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 30 Jan 2014, at 05:41, Johan Edstrom <
> seijoed@
> > wrote:
>>>>
>>>> A big -1 that is non binding.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm tired of this shit, let us put it all on the table.
>>>>> I probably made around 75k USD last year supporting and writing code
>>>>> around AMQ.
>>>>> If you count the other work I probably made closer to 300k USD, so yes
>>>>> I'm really open.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm working with or I am surrounded by the people that benefit from
>>>>> what AMQ does.
>>>>>
>>>>> So I'll go on and list the rest of the people here - Just from the
>>>>> last
>>>>> post.
>>>>>
>>>>> Dejan, +1 - RedHat
>>>>> Hiram, +1 - RedHat
>>>>> Rob +1 - RedHat,
>>>>> Claus +1 RedHat,
>>>>>
>>>>> I could go on, I could also put their purchase history from Fuse to
>>>>> RedHat,
>>>>> inspect AS Server Modules and SwitchYard.
>>>>> Then I could ask if there was a monetary gain in Hawt (WTF?) is
>>>>> introduced into
>>>>> Jiras, emails, mailing lists or whatever the hell else?
>>>>>
>>>>> So - we have a PMC telling us that not using ASF code but rather RH
>>>>> code is good
>>>>> - since it is Secure,
>>>>> - since it isn't the 90's
>>>>> - since it is what the customer wants?
>>>>>
>>>>> Does anyone actually believe this load of shit?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Jan 29, 2014, at 12:14 PM, Kevin Earls <
> kearls@
> > wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> +1
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Jan 29, 2014, at 11:29 AM, Dejan Bosanac <
> dejan@
> >
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> +1
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Regards
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Dejan Bosanac
>>>>>>> ----------------------
>>>>>>> Red Hat, Inc.
>>>>>>> FuseSource is now part of Red Hat
>>>>>>>
> dbosanac@
>>>>>>> Twitter: @dejanb
>>>>>>> Blog: http://sensatic.net
>>>>>>> ActiveMQ in Action: http://www.manning.com/snyder/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 9:01 AM, James Strachan <
>>>>>>>
> james.strachan@
>>wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> +1
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 28 January 2014 15:18, Hiram Chirino <
> hiram@
> >
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Since there seems to be general agreement that the web-console
>>>>>>>>> should
>>>>>>>>> be moved to a sub-project, lets put it to a vote and make it
>>>>>>>>> official.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> [ ] +1 Create the activemq-web-console sub-project with the
>>>>>>>>> associated
>>>>>>>>> git, wiki, and jira spaces.
>>>>>>>>> [ ] -1 Veto the making it a sub-project
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>> Hiram Chirino
>>>>>>>>> Engineering | Red Hat, Inc.
>>>>>>>>>
> hchirino@
> | fusesource.com | redhat.com
>>>>>>>>> skype: hiramchirino | twitter: @hiramchirino
>>>>>>>>> blog: Hiram Chirino's Bit Mojo
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> James
>>>>>>>> -------
>>>>>>>> Red Hat
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Email:
> jstracha@
>>>>>>>> Web: http://fusesource.com
>>>>>>>> Twitter: jstrachan, fusenews
>>>>>>>> Blog: http://macstrac.blogspot.com/
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Open Source Integration
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Rob Davies
>>>> ----------------
>>>> Red Hat, Inc
>>>> http://hawt.io - #dontcha
>>>> Twitter: rajdavies
>>>> Blog: http://rajdavies.blogspot.com
>>>> ActiveMQ in Action: http://www.manning.com/snyder/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
--
View this message in context:
http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/VOTE-Move-the-ActiveMQ-web-console-to-a-sub-project-tp4676877p4677061.html
Sent from the ActiveMQ - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
