@CShannon: I saw a few guys from Brazil (Right, @Fabio?), implementing an awesome interface on top of Artemis using Grafana:
https://github.com/grafana/grafana Pretty impressive. :O If we build a separate repo, we could have scripts for things like Grafana, or other tools like this!!!! It would rock!!! On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 11:13 AM, Christopher Shannon <[email protected]> wrote: > Agreed, having a good user experience should be a high priority and having > some way to configure a broker and monitor a broker at runtime that is user > friendly is ideal. If the web console can rely on something like a REST > service and JMX for data then it will also allow other tools to be built to > help with management. Besides a web console I also find a command line > interface based console to be really useful. Being able to quickly run > commands from a shell to do things such as make configuration changes or > view metrics is useful because it is fast and can be easily scripted. > > On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 11:05 AM, Martyn Taylor <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Thanks for restoring this discussion. >> >> On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 3:38 PM, Clebert Suconic < >> [email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> > What about start doing it right after Artemis 2.0.0 is out? Aim it to >> > 2.1.0 (on Artemis, being compatible with AMQ5 (still a question mark >> > on how to do it.. but I"m taking this is a requirement)). >> > >> > >> > On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 9:38 AM, Christopher Shannon >> > <[email protected]> wrote: >> > > Yes there seemed to be some consensus to build a plugin hosted here at >> > > Apache or to build a new console altogether to support 5.x and Artemis. >> > > And we would keep the existing console until then. >> > >> Yes! >> >> The console is something I am really passionate about. In my opinion user >> experience is the number one priority and the lack of any form of console >> in Artemis is just a disaster. We're really missing a trick here as I >> think we could build something fantastic for both ActiveMQ 5.x and Artemis. >> >> > >> > > However, the hold up has always been finding people who have time to >> work >> > > on it and want to work on it. If someone wants to create a repo and >> > start >> > > working on it that would probably help to get others involved. >> > >> I'm more than happy to take this on and get a repository created and put a >> basic framework in place. This should get the ball rolling. >> >> > > >> > > On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 9:23 AM, Daniel Kulp <[email protected]> wrote: >> > > >> > >> >> > >> > On Feb 17, 2017, at 8:52 AM, Clebert Suconic < >> > [email protected]> >> > >> wrote: >> > >> > >> > >> > On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 4:48 AM, Christian Schneider >> > >> > <[email protected]> wrote: >> > >> >> I have read the old threads about the web console. >> > >> >> >> > >> >> If I understood correctly then we would like to get rid of the >> > current >> > >> >> activemq web console but need a replacement. There is hawt.io >> which >> > >> >> functionally would work but which is not compatible from a >> community >> > >> >> standpoint. >> > >> > >> > >> > My understand was: as long as it looked like an apache console, and >> > >> > not a commercial product belonging to any company it would be ok. >> > >> > >> > >> >> > >> *AND* all of the ActiveMQ/Artemis related bits are written and >> > maintained >> > >> here at Apache as part of this community. How the queues and brokers >> > and >> > >> such are presented to the user is completely under the control of this >> > >> community. >> > >> >> > >> In other words: we don’t take the activemq plugin or whatever they >> have >> > >> and use it as is. (Unless they want to donate it to this community) >> > >> >> > >> -- >> > >> Daniel Kulp >> > >> [email protected] - http://dankulp.com/blog >> > >> Talend Community Coder - http://coders.talend.com >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > Clebert Suconic >> > >> -- Clebert Suconic
