Just to confirm...The repo name should be "activemq-artemis-console-plugin", right?
Justin On Tue, Mar 19, 2024 at 9:22 AM Andy Taylor <andy.tayl...@gmail.com> wrote: > turns out I don't have permissions to create a repo, could someone from the > PMC do this for me? > > On Tue, 19 Mar 2024 at 09:27, Andy Taylor <andy.tayl...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > I will go ahead and request the new repo today > > > > On Mon, 18 Mar 2024 at 18:39, Timothy Bish <tabish...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> On 3/18/24 13:33, Andy Taylor wrote: > >> > so I am open to names, how about artemis-console-plugin v1.0.0 > >> > >> +1 > >> > >> > >> > On Mon, 18 Mar 2024 at 17:24, Clebert Suconic < > >> clebert.suco...@gmail.com> > >> > wrote: > >> > > >> >> +1 on activemq-artemis-console-plugin > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> As Robbie said, you will need different versions for it. I feel like > >> >> it would be easier to use a different name... but I don't mind what > >> >> you have to do. Whatever makes it easier to be implemented. > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> On Mon, Mar 18, 2024 at 1:10 PM Robbie Gemmell < > >> robbie.gemm...@gmail.com> > >> >> wrote: > >> >>> On the module name, if it stays the same then consideration would > also > >> >>> need to be given to the version. It would need to be higher than > >> >>> before to keep using the same name, but using a broker version isnt > >> >>> necessarily that obvious if we dont expect to release it on the same > >> >>> schedule as the broker. > >> >>> > >> >>> On Mon, 18 Mar 2024 at 16:46, Andy Taylor <andy.tayl...@gmail.com> > >> >> wrote: > >> >>>> +1 for avtivemq-artemis-console-plugin but I think we should keep > >> the > >> >>>> artifact name as it is now for consistency, i.e. artemis-plugin > >> >>>> > >> >>>> On Mon, 18 Mar 2024 at 16:29, Robbie Gemmell < > >> robbie.gemm...@gmail.com > >> >>>> wrote: > >> >>>> > >> >>>>> We should discuss the name then someone can create it via > >> >>>>> https://selfserve.apache.org > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> It would be something of the form activemq-artemis-<foo> for > >> >>>>> consistency. Regarding <foo>, what is actually going in it, a > >> console > >> >>>>> 'plugin' ? > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> So perhaps activemq-artemis-console-plugin ? > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> On Mon, 18 Mar 2024 at 07:46, Andy Taylor <andy.tayl...@gmail.com > > > >> >> wrote: > >> >>>>>> Lets go with a separate repo then, @clebert or anyone, can you > >> >> create me > >> >>>>> a > >> >>>>>> new repo or talk me thru how to do it. What shall we call this > new > >> >>>>>> component/repo, considering we will still have an artemis-console > >> >> module > >> >>>>> in > >> >>>>>> the artemis repo? > >> >>>>>> > >> >>>>>> Clebert, I will add this new fields in your PR to the new console > >> >> as > >> >>>>> well. > >> >>>>>> Andy > >> >>>>>> > >> >>>>>> On Fri, 15 Mar 2024 at 19:03, Clebert Suconic < > >> >> clebert.suco...@gmail.com > >> >>>>>> wrote: > >> >>>>>> > >> >>>>>>> I think we have a consensus on a separate repo. > >> >>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>> @Andy: me an Anton, we wre adding a field for internal queues > >> >> in the > >> >>>>> admin > >> >>>>>>> console. If you could make sure we keep that on the new one > >> >> please ? > >> >>>>> Or > >> >>>>>>> let us know how to adjust it? > >> >>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/4856 > >> >>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 14, 2024 at 10:29 AM Justin Bertram < > >> >> jbert...@apache.org> > >> >>>>>>> wrote: > >> >>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>> +1 for a separate repo > >> >>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>> Justin > >> >>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 14, 2024 at 3:56 AM 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 > >> >> > >> > >> -- > >> Tim Bish > >> > >> >
