Should I wait for the 2.33 release ?
See my other thread about the heads up. Or you think this may take a lot longer ? On Wed, Mar 13, 2024 at 7:27 AM Andy Taylor <andy.tayl...@gmail.com> wrote: > The current Artemis console is based on HawtIO 1 which itself is written > using Bootstrap. Bootstrap is old and no longer maintained so HawtIO (v3/4) > has moved to use React and Patternfly and is also written in Typescript. > > I have been working in the background over the last several months to > upgrade the console to hawtIO 4, this work can be found here > <https://github.com/andytaylor/activemq-artemis/tree/artemis-console-ng>. > This is still a WIP but is close to completion, I basically have to finish > off some branding, fix the console tests and implement an upgrade feature. > A couple of things to note: > > > - I have separated out the JMX tree and its tabs from the tabs that are > not related to the tree selection. I always found this a bit strange so > now > there are 2 tabs Artemis and Artemis JMX, the latter uses the JMX tree > as > before. It is possible however to do anything in the Artemis tab that > you > can do in the JMX tab, view attributes and operations for instance. > There > is an issue currently where if there are thousands of address or queues > then performance becomes an issue. this is because the whole JMX tree is > loaded into memory and this can cause even the broker to fall over. My > plan > at some point is to allow disabling the JMX view and to lazy load in > MBeans > as and when needed, this is a task for further down the road tho. > - The console is built using yarn and is incredibly slow to build, in > fact it takes longer than it takes to build the rest of Artemis. It may > be > better to have the new console in its own repository, release it > independently and just consume it in Artemis. This means some extra work > for a release but once the console becomes stable it shouldn't be too > much > work. I will however let the community decide what is the best approach. > > > There are still a few issues I know of, the Attributes tab seems to delay > loading and the broker topology diagram is incomplete but feel free to > suggest any improvements or buglets you come across on this thread. > Hopefully I can tie up the loose ends soon and raise a PR in the not too > distant future. > > Andy >
