I would agree, we should stick to the plan. 

Merging straight after release and releasing again won't delay in reality the 
time people can use it. Apart from a few days at most.

 But will address/de risks any concerns.




Sent from my iPhone

> On 13 Jul 2017, at 17:23, Timothy Bish <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
>> On 07/13/2017 12:10 PM, Clebert Suconic wrote:
>> I am tempted to merge it now actually....
>> 
>> Anyone opposed to this? it would be cool to have a console on this
>> next release.. if it's all good.
> 
> Please stick to the original plan.  I guessing there's other folks like 
> myself who haven't had time to even look at this new console yet.
> 
>> 
>> On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 3:30 PM, Michael André Pearce
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> Hi All,
>>> 
>>> I would like to start a fresh discussion to keep things cleaner, and to 
>>> provide more of a notification/update. (also to better name the subject)
>>> 
>>> The requirement for such a tool comes from many end users (including 
>>> myself) which keep requesting such a feature of a web management console (a 
>>> small selection of a much larger list i can supply many more), and so 
>>> becomes more and more pressing to resolve.
>>> 
>>> http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/How-to-monitor-artemis-td4727071.html 
>>> <http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/How-to-monitor-artemis-td4727071.html>
>>> https://softwarerecs.stackexchange.com/questions/39052/administration-console-for-artemis-jms-broker
>>>  
>>> <https://softwarerecs.stackexchange.com/questions/39052/administration-console-for-artemis-jms-broker>
>>> https://stackoverflow.com/questions/37162532/how-to-monitor-apache-artemis 
>>> <https://stackoverflow.com/questions/37162532/how-to-monitor-apache-artemis>
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Based off the discussion here:
>>> 
>>> http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/DISCUSS-Removing-the-Web-Console-td4717136i40.html#a4728199
>>>  
>>> <http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/DISCUSS-Removing-the-Web-Console-td4717136i40.html#a4728199>
>>> 
>>> We have some key requirements as noted were (not exhaustive but a small 
>>> summary of noted in the above thread):
>>> 
>>> Must be ActiveMQ Branded
>>> No third party / propriety other products should be mentioned apart from a 
>>> powered by.
>>> Help and about pages should be ActiveMQ Artemis focussed
>>> Provide functionality to manage the broker
>>> This should be able to expand over time
>>> License/Notice files and any legal requirements are updated/met
>>> The war size should be kept to a minimum
>>> Login/Security should be integrated to the broker roles/users
>>> Plugins/customisation specific to AcitveMQ Artemis to reside in ActiveMQ 
>>> Artemis project.
>>> 
>>> Also we had some good early feedback in the community on the missing bits 
>>> in our early PR, of bits that needed/must be addressed. (thanks to Dan, 
>>> Clebert, Martyn).
>>> 
>>> We believe we have a viable “agreeable" solution to provide a web console 
>>> admin for Apache ActiveMQ Artemis.
>>> 
>>> As such we don’t see any reason to hold off and would like to bring your 
>>> attention (again) to the PR please make any standard review comments there.
>>> 
>>> https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1385 
>>> <https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/1385>
>>> 
>>> Also there has been a small discussion on how to release this, so that we 
>>> can start to get end user feedback, as users tend to want a built usable 
>>> distribution, like wise there is concern of bundling this into the next 
>>> release.
>>> 
>>> We propose:
>>> We will release the upcoming next version of Apache ActiveMQ Artemis, 
>>> WITHOUT the new web console. This is due to occur in the coming week.
>>> We will then subsequently look to merge and release another version of 
>>> Apache ActiveMQ Artemis WITH the console, so it is in a clean release with 
>>> only the addition of the web console. This should occur almost immediately 
>>> after.
>>> 
>>> I should thank Clebert and Martyn in offering to run the extra release this 
>>> would require, but de-risk some community concerns.
>>> 
>>> This solution is based off a hawtio framework, i would like to iterate i am 
>>> not a RedHat employee, nor anything to do with Hawtio project. I work for a 
>>> company that uses the project like other end users, and simply see it as a 
>>> framework to enable us in activemq to deliver a usable web management 
>>> console for artemis with as little cost, effort and maintenance as 
>>> possible, to provide an immediate need in the user community.
>>> 
>>> Many thanks
>>> Mike
>> 
>> 
> 
> -- 
> Tim Bish
> twitter: @tabish121
> blog: http://timbish.blogspot.com/
> 

Reply via email to