Looks fine to me at a glance. We perhaps still have too much code in the pages, but it's probably better to concentrate on the framework change for now, and do refactorings later. I'm also not sure about using underscore in the sub-page names.
Stoty On Thu, Apr 3, 2025 at 9:38 AM Dávid Paksy <paksyda...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi All, > > Since there are quite some Jamon code, as a first step I created a PR to > migrate the Master Status page back to JSP: > https://github.com/apache/hbase/pull/6875 > > I still have to test it a bit more but I'd be interested in your opinion > about it. > > Many thanks, > Dávid > > Dávid Paksy <paksyda...@gmail.com> ezt írta (időpont: 2025. márc. 27., Cs, > 11:49): > > > Many thanks for your responses and for the good discussion. > > > > For the next step, I created HBASE-29223 to start migrating Jamon back to > > JSP. > > > > Best Regards, > > Dávid > > > > Nick Dimiduk <ndimi...@apache.org> ezt írta (időpont: 2025. jan. 22., > > Sze, 14:05): > > > >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:04 AM Istvan Toth <st...@cloudera.com.invalid > > > >> wrote: > >> > > >> > On the beans topic: > >> > It does not have to be RPC, for server-side rendered pages, simply > >> > moving non-trivial logic from the JSP file itself to a separate java > >> class > >> > may be an improvement. > >> > (Though most of the heavy lifting is already done via the HBase API) > >> > >> This is the type of improvement that I meant to suggest when bringing > >> up Jersey and beans. My thinking is that we would render out all the > >> information necessary to present a page as a self-contained "bean" / > >> POJO / whatever data object, and then the UI would be responsible only > >> for rendering an appropriate view of that object. The existing Jersey > >> stuff renders to JSON, but we can just as easily render to html. > >> > >> I think that we are aligned on principal. > >> > >> Thanks, > >> Nick > >> > >> > On Thu, Dec 12, 2024 at 1:20 PM Nick Dimiduk <ndimi...@apache.org> > >> wrote: > >> > > >> > > Thanks for bringing this up Dávid. > >> > > > >> > > Istvan has covered a lot of ground in his reply and I generally > agree > >> with > >> > > him. I agree that we should support server-side rendering over a > >> JS-heavy > >> > > solution. I agree that JSP is old but an entrenched standard, which > >> has > >> > > some appeal given our history. > >> > > > >> > > I am concerned that we won’t ever attract frontend developers by > >> leaning > >> > > into such an old technology stack. This hurts the project doubly > >> because it > >> > > means both our product AND our website languishes looking old and > >> outdated. > >> > > > >> > > I think that we should be able to selectively opt-in to more modern > JS > >> > > features. The Region Visualizer on the Master UI is one such > example. > >> To be > >> > > my own critic on that feature, I do not know if the UI degrades > >> gracefully > >> > > for a client that does not support JS. > >> > > > >> > > On the comment about moving the JSPs over to consuming beans, I did > >> start > >> > > an effort around this by introducing a modern (at the time) Jersey > >> > > environment. I think anyway that we can continue to build on Jersey > to > >> > > render model objects that get rendered out via JSP (or whatever). > >> > > > >> > > Thanks, > >> > > Nick > >> > > > >> > > On Thu, 12 Dec 2024 at 12:55, Istvan Toth > <st...@cloudera.com.invalid > >> > > >> > > wrote: > >> > > > >> > > > I never thought that I would voice support for JSP, but I think > >> that the > >> > > > Jamon situation is a good example of the advantages of JSP. > >> > > > > >> > > > Yes, JSP is old, kludgy and limited, but it has been around since > >> > > forever, > >> > > > and as it is part of the Java EE (jakarta) standard, we can also > >> expect > >> > > it > >> > > > to be around for a long time. > >> > > > Jamon was a hot new thing when it was adopted by us, but just two > >> years > >> > > > later it was discontinued. > >> > > > > >> > > > I think that given what the HBase web UI needs to do, and given > the > >> lack > >> > > of > >> > > > frontend focus and resources in HBase, something like JSP is > >> exactly the > >> > > > right technology for us. > >> > > > It is simple, super easy to pick up, has minimal dependencies, and > >> there > >> > > is > >> > > > a minimal surface area for security issues with it. > >> > > > > >> > > > If we move to another server-side rendering framework, there is no > >> > > > guarantee that that framework would be around long enough for our > >> > > purposes. > >> > > > > >> > > > (Having said that, the existing JSP pages could certainly be > >> improved by > >> > > > moving most of the Java code to some backing beans) > >> > > > > >> > > > I also want to pre-emptively mention that I would consider moving > >> to some > >> > > > client-side rendering framework a huge mistake, as HBase does not > >> need > >> > > such > >> > > > functionality, and adding another intense upgrade and rewrite > >> treadmill > >> > > > that few of us has the expertise for would just waste our > resources. > >> > > > > >> > > > Istvan > >> > > > > >> > > > On Thu, Dec 12, 2024 at 11:30 AM 张铎(Duo Zhang) < > >> palomino...@gmail.com> > >> > > > wrote: > >> > > > > >> > > > > Are there any new ways to implement this? > >> > > > > JSP is also a very old technology... > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Dávid Paksy <paksyda...@gmail.com> 于2024年12月12日周四 17:58写道： > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > Hi, > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > Sorry for sending this again - but the former mail landed in > >> spam > >> > > > > (because > >> > > > > > of the links) for some people. > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > While I was working on HBASE-28832 to migrate Bootstrap I > >> noticed > >> > > that > >> > > > > > HBase have a mix of JSP and Jamon code. Looks like HBASE-3835 > >> started > >> > > > the > >> > > > > > work in 2011 of converting from JSP to Jamon, but the work > >> didn't > >> > > > finish. > >> > > > > > I guess the best would be to either migrate everything to > Jamon > >> or > >> > > back > >> > > > > to > >> > > > > > JSP as having both is not ideal from maintenance perspective. > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > While Jamon has advantages (static typing of template > >> arguments, unit > >> > > > > > testing, etc), looking at the Jamon project, it seems that the > >> last > >> > > > > release > >> > > > > > was on 2013-12-29 and I see no newer activity. > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > From this I think moving back the Jamon files to JSP would > >> maybe make > >> > > > > more > >> > > > > > sense now. > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > What do you all think about this? > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > Many thanks in advance, > >> > > > > > Dávid > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > -- > >> > > > *István Tóth* | Sr. Staff Software Engineer > >> > > > *Email*: st...@cloudera.com > >> > > > cloudera.com <https://www.cloudera.com> > >> > > > [image: Cloudera] <https://www.cloudera.com/> > >> > > > [image: Cloudera on Twitter] <https://twitter.com/cloudera> > [image: > >> > > > Cloudera on Facebook] <https://www.facebook.com/cloudera> [image: > >> > > Cloudera > >> > > > on LinkedIn] <https://www.linkedin.com/company/cloudera> > >> > > > ------------------------------ > >> > > > ------------------------------ > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > >> > -- > >> > *István Tóth* | Sr. Staff Software Engineer > >> > *Email*: st...@cloudera.com > >> > cloudera.com <https://www.cloudera.com> > >> > [image: Cloudera] <https://www.cloudera.com/> > >> > [image: Cloudera on Twitter] <https://twitter.com/cloudera> [image: > >> > Cloudera on Facebook] <https://www.facebook.com/cloudera> [image: > >> Cloudera > >> > on LinkedIn] <https://www.linkedin.com/company/cloudera> > >> > ------------------------------ > >> > ------------------------------ > >> > > >
