On Mon, 16 Apr 2018, at 6:53 PM, Alexandre Rafalovitch wrote: > > It really depends on what your goal is: a refreshed UI or getting rid of > > AngularJS > > I think that's an interesting question. Do we _know_ how a refreshed > UI could be better than what we have now? > *) Better mobile UI was one suggestion > *) Reviewing it myself, I feel that there is lack of clarity whether > some information/operation is Global, Collection-level, Core-level, or > node-level. E.g. "Dashboard, java properties and thread dumps" are > actually node level, next to Cloud, Collections and Suggestions that > are global level. Next to logging, which I am guessing is a node > level. > *) Query screen had a number of requests against it, especially in > regards to newer features > *) Pluggable UI (e.g. for DIH) was a request and other plugins > (/browse?) would probably enjoy a hook too (though it did not work out > with admin-extra.html so much) > > Because that's the first question a "UI designer from somewhere" will > ask, even if we could have an access to one.
It is worth noting the heritage of the current UI. It was a reworking of the old, ugly JSP admin UI in 3.x. It more or less took the same pages and made them (much) more beautiful. Then the angular one took that and gave it a newer backend. And then collections awareness was added. Each of these were additive, leading to a little bit of an architectural mess. So I think you are right - the first step is one of information architecture - how do we present all the details. That could then be presented to a UI designer if we found one. And one might be easier to find if we had the architecture. Not only that, it might be possible to start building using something like Bootstrap or MaterialUI, and style it later - i.e. just following conventions rather than doing 'design'. Upayavira --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
