That's nice.. so I guess we could now reboot the conversation around hawtIO/webconsole... lets forget the past. and do it from scratch
My feeling around this was.... it's a pandora box.. don't touch it.. @jgenender used that same word here on this thread. so... IMO, the Web console needs to look an apache product.. regardless of what components you use. if someone can provide a clean and nice implementation.. using whatever frameworks or components that are apache (or compatible) license, I think that's a reasonable consideration. And with git / github, we can first propose how it will look like, and merge when it's pretty and ready. That's also a difference from 2 or 3 years ago when these discussions were taking place, where even if git was being used the workflow was pretty much the same svn style. I won't be able myself to work on this for a few weeks as I am working on a few improvements around replication, that I want to do for 1.5.0. but I think this would open the possibility of someone else looking into that.. both from AMQ5 and/or Artemis perspective. so if you (anyone) start working around this give us a sign here, so there wouldn't be two people working on the same task. A request I make is.. lets start fresh and do something cool and nice... ;) On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 11:14 AM, jgenender <[email protected]> wrote: > clebertsuconic wrote >> I don't want to read that discussion again.. but from what I remember >> of what I once read, and after I talked to some guys in person, the >> issue was where the component would live.. like the plugin being >> outside of AMQ5 code. >> >> I believe that if we consumed hawt-io as a component (just like we >> consume Jetty), and have the plugins, checkstyles, apache branding, >> activemq5 and Artemis brand on the main repo, it shouldn't be an >> issue. > > I wouldn't speculate. I wouldn't even attempt it unless you have examined > the issues and do a 5 minute perusal on the thread. I won't argue what it > was because I, and some other non-Red Hat folks were central to that > discussion. > > My recommendation... don't rehash that. Look at the primary problems were > (tl;dr; I mentioned them previously). Come up with a reasonable community > based solution to the issues and present them. > > That said, I think branding would help significantly as long as any other > concerns are resolved. I do know that templating it was certainly one of > the offered solutions. > > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/DISCUSS-Removing-the-Web-Console-tp4717136p4717302.html > Sent from the ActiveMQ - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- Clebert Suconic
