+1 separate repo On Thu, 14 Mar 2024 at 14:07, Clebert Suconic <clebert.suco...@gmail.com> wrote:
> +1 separate repo > > On Thu, Mar 14, 2024 at 7:12 AM Robbie Gemmell <robbie.gemm...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > That it can actually be run standalone would be another reason I'd > > also choose to go with a separate repo. > > > > Lets allow other folks time to chip in their opinions, if a separate > > repo appears to be the consensus we can then look to create one. > > > > On Thu, 14 Mar 2024 at 08:51, Andy Taylor <andy.tayl...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > > > Clebert, I think it will be weeks rather than days so I would just > release > > > when you are ready. > > > > > > Robbie, I think for now a separate repo is my preferred solution, the > > > console can actually be run outside of embedded artemis so development > is > > > easy. Can someone create a new repo? > > > > > > On Wed, 13 Mar 2024 at 17:45, Clebert Suconic < > clebert.suco...@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > If it was a matter of 1 day to include it I would prefer to wait for > it. > > > > Other than that then I’m releasing on Monday. > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 13, 2024 at 1:40 PM Robbie Gemmell < > robbie.gemm...@gmail.com> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > I'd say the answer to 'Wait for <foo> to do a release?' is usually > no > > > > > unless its about a blocking bug/regression or there's really > nothing > > > > > else important ready to go. This definitely isnt that and also isnt > > > > > ready yet while other stuff is, so seems a clear no to me. > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, 13 Mar 2024 at 16:58, Clebert Suconic < > clebert.suco...@gmail.com > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > 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 Bootstrap is old and no longer maintained so 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 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > Clebert Suconic >
