Re: Swing console?
Awesome! Let me know if and how I can help.On Sep 21, 2006, at 2:17 PM, Simone Bordet wrote:Hi,On 9/18/06, Heinz Drews <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: That is a good suggestion.I agree with your opinion about webapps.Especially during development it seems, that using a component toconfigure the component which it is dependent on, is increasing risks.I had several times to manually modify config.xml to get G started againPersonally I would prefer an application based on Eclipse because thiscould be nicely integrated with the plugin for launching G. Just to mention that at LiveTribe we're building an Eclipse-based RCPconsole, and the goals are to use the plugin architecture of Eclipseto create a completely modular RCP application that can manage/monitorthe most common app servers, with the ability of replacing completelythe UI if you don't like it (or for special management purposes).We're currently doing this for Jetty, next in list is G and AMQ.Simon-- http://livetribe.codehaus.orghttp://bordet.blogspot.com -sachin
Re: Swing console?
Aaron, that will be a lot of Jiras. I have experimented a lot with security realms and keystore entries. Effectively every error in this area prevents the server from starting. GERONIMO-2366 and GERONIMO-2367 are just two of the problems I have experienced. For most of the parameters console does not sufficiently performs validation. And there is no recovery at startup. Heinz On 9/21/06, Aaron Mulder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Just for the record, any time you need to manually modify config.xml to get Geronimo to start or work correctly, please please file a Jira issue with the details -- we need to fix those regardless of what technology the console uses. Personally, I'm not so keen on a console that runs without the server running, but I'm open to discussion on it. It doesn't matter so much to me whether the console is web or Swing. But personally, I'd be more inclined to refactor it all to use the Spring portlet framework than to refactor it into Swing. Thanks, Aaron On 9/18/06, Heinz Drews <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > That is a good suggestion. > > I agree with your opinion about webapps. > Especially during development it seems, that using a component to > configure the component which it is dependent on, is increasing risks. > I had several times to manually modify config.xml to get G started again > > Personally I would prefer an application based on Eclipse because this > could be nicely integrated with the plugin for launching G. > > Heinz > > On 9/17/06, Jason Dillon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Anyone have any thoughts on using Swing for the console... instead of > > a webapp (which are kinda evil IMO)... and then using webstart to > > serve it? Maybe using Netbeans (or that license not ASL friendly)? > > I've done some work with NB before at it would be very easy to create > > a rich user experience... and its easy to drop in new modules to > > support different aspects of administration and monitoring. > > > > I dunno.. just a thought... > > > > --jason > > >
Re: Swing console?
Heinz, On 9/21/06, Heinz Drews <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hello Simon, that sounds great. Is there already something available to get a starting point? Well, for now a very small starting point, but we're open to ideas. Code is at https://svn.codehaus.org/livetribe/nursery/livetribe-console/trunk, tomorrow I am going to write some docs about how to build it and what environment is needed. Simon -- http://livetribe.codehaus.org http://bordet.blogspot.com
Re: Swing console?
Hello Simon, that sounds great. Is there already something available to get a starting point? Heinz On 9/21/06, Simone Bordet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi, On 9/18/06, Heinz Drews <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > That is a good suggestion. > > I agree with your opinion about webapps. > Especially during development it seems, that using a component to > configure the component which it is dependent on, is increasing risks. > I had several times to manually modify config.xml to get G started again > > Personally I would prefer an application based on Eclipse because this > could be nicely integrated with the plugin for launching G. Just to mention that at LiveTribe we're building an Eclipse-based RCP console, and the goals are to use the plugin architecture of Eclipse to create a completely modular RCP application that can manage/monitor the most common app servers, with the ability of replacing completely the UI if you don't like it (or for special management purposes). We're currently doing this for Jetty, next in list is G and AMQ. Simon -- http://livetribe.codehaus.org http://bordet.blogspot.com
Re: Swing console?
Hi, On 9/21/06, Jason Dillon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Ah, thats good news... I was not aware of this. The webstart config does not download all platform natives for a given run does it? No, it does not, if the JNLP file has something like: ... Simon
Re: Swing console?
Ah, thats good news... I was not aware of this. The webstart config does not download all platform natives for a given run does it? --jason On Sep 21, 2006, at 11:26 AM, Simone Bordet wrote: Hi, On 9/21/06, Jason Dillon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Can Eclipse be webstarted? Yes, since Eclipse 3.1. Simon
Re: Swing console?
Hi, On 9/21/06, Jason Dillon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Can Eclipse be webstarted? Yes, since Eclipse 3.1. Simon
Re: Swing console?
Can Eclipse be webstarted? --jason On Sep 21, 2006, at 11:17 AM, Simone Bordet wrote: Hi, On 9/18/06, Heinz Drews <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: That is a good suggestion. I agree with your opinion about webapps. Especially during development it seems, that using a component to configure the component which it is dependent on, is increasing risks. I had several times to manually modify config.xml to get G started again Personally I would prefer an application based on Eclipse because this could be nicely integrated with the plugin for launching G. Just to mention that at LiveTribe we're building an Eclipse-based RCP console, and the goals are to use the plugin architecture of Eclipse to create a completely modular RCP application that can manage/monitor the most common app servers, with the ability of replacing completely the UI if you don't like it (or for special management purposes). We're currently doing this for Jetty, next in list is G and AMQ. Simon -- http://livetribe.codehaus.org http://bordet.blogspot.com
Re: Swing console?
Hi, On 9/18/06, Heinz Drews <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: That is a good suggestion. I agree with your opinion about webapps. Especially during development it seems, that using a component to configure the component which it is dependent on, is increasing risks. I had several times to manually modify config.xml to get G started again Personally I would prefer an application based on Eclipse because this could be nicely integrated with the plugin for launching G. Just to mention that at LiveTribe we're building an Eclipse-based RCP console, and the goals are to use the plugin architecture of Eclipse to create a completely modular RCP application that can manage/monitor the most common app servers, with the ability of replacing completely the UI if you don't like it (or for special management purposes). We're currently doing this for Jetty, next in list is G and AMQ. Simon -- http://livetribe.codehaus.org http://bordet.blogspot.com
Re: Swing console?
Just for the record, any time you need to manually modify config.xml to get Geronimo to start or work correctly, please please file a Jira issue with the details -- we need to fix those regardless of what technology the console uses. Personally, I'm not so keen on a console that runs without the server running, but I'm open to discussion on it. It doesn't matter so much to me whether the console is web or Swing. But personally, I'd be more inclined to refactor it all to use the Spring portlet framework than to refactor it into Swing. Thanks, Aaron On 9/18/06, Heinz Drews <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: That is a good suggestion. I agree with your opinion about webapps. Especially during development it seems, that using a component to configure the component which it is dependent on, is increasing risks. I had several times to manually modify config.xml to get G started again Personally I would prefer an application based on Eclipse because this could be nicely integrated with the plugin for launching G. Heinz On 9/17/06, Jason Dillon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Anyone have any thoughts on using Swing for the console... instead of > a webapp (which are kinda evil IMO)... and then using webstart to > serve it? Maybe using Netbeans (or that license not ASL friendly)? > I've done some work with NB before at it would be very easy to create > a rich user experience... and its easy to drop in new modules to > support different aspects of administration and monitoring. > > I dunno.. just a thought... > > --jason >
Re: Swing console?
On 9/20/06, Heinz Drews <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: What should be done first and how can I help? This discussion has brought several valid points to light. For each of these points I think it would be helpful to know if there is some creative way to improve the current web based implementation to address the real issue, at least in some limited way, or decide that we're truly constrained by the UI platform. The ideas for improvement can generate JIRAs against the current admin console and the "unavoidable" issues could either be addressed by making improvements to the command line interface or serve as the basis for discussion about a new alternate/special purpose UI. A first pass at that list would be very helpful. Best wishes, Paul
Re: Swing console?
The Swing console in WAS could only be used as an example how rich clients should not be done. The integrated console in WSAD was significantly better but was not providing all functions. But if you start referring WAS, there the admin console is started on a different http port, can be forced to http in a very simple way. It can run i.e. on the cell component independently from server instances and can manage all servers in a distributed / clustered environment. All things I miss in G. But I'm not complaining, just listing options. What should be done first and how can I help? Heinz On 9/20/06, Matt Hogstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: If IBM's experience is any indicator the Swing Management Console disappeared in WebSphere Version 5 because customers didn't like a heavyweight thing to carry around. The overwhelming response from users was give us a web console. FWIW. On Sep 17, 2006, at 4:42 PM, Jason Dillon wrote: > Anyone have any thoughts on using Swing for the console... instead > of a webapp (which are kinda evil IMO)... and then using webstart > to serve it? Maybe using Netbeans (or that license not ASL > friendly)? I've done some work with NB before at it would be very > easy to create a rich user experience... and its easy to drop in > new modules to support different aspects of administration and > monitoring. > > I dunno.. just a thought... > > --jason > > Matt Hogstrom [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Swing console?
If IBM's experience is any indicator the Swing Management Console disappeared in WebSphere Version 5 because customers didn't like a heavyweight thing to carry around. The overwhelming response from users was give us a web console. FWIW. On Sep 17, 2006, at 4:42 PM, Jason Dillon wrote: Anyone have any thoughts on using Swing for the console... instead of a webapp (which are kinda evil IMO)... and then using webstart to serve it? Maybe using Netbeans (or that license not ASL friendly)? I've done some work with NB before at it would be very easy to create a rich user experience... and its easy to drop in new modules to support different aspects of administration and monitoring. I dunno.. just a thought... --jason Matt Hogstrom [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Swing console?
Another aspect of the current approach is related to security. The console in the default configuration runs on the standard http port and uses just basic authentication. That's as reliable as the promise of a politician. It's a risk to expose G directly to a public network but I don't like to run an apache server in front of it just to protect console from external access. Therefore either an non webapp as admin function or an own special http server. Heinz On 9/19/06, Paul McMahan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: You raise an excellent point, which is that all that functionality in the console doesn't do much good if the server won't start. I also really like your idea that the console should be able to run in a server with a minimalistic configuration. To me this is analogous to booting an operating system in recovery mode so you can make repairs using the console before rebooting in normal mode. I think this could be accomplished by providing a specialized config, say var/config/minimal-config.xml, that would get loaded if you passed a special flag to geronimo.sh. The console is not currently implemented in such a way that would allow this because it uses Geronimo's dependency system to gain the level of access it needs to administer a module. e.g. its deployment plan has a dependency against geronimo-activemq-gbean so that it can manage ActiveMQ. As a result ActiveMQ needs to be running before the console can start But with all the excitement around Little G and modularizing the server via plugins we've been talking about changing this so that the console can manage incremental bits of function. As part of that effort I think that we definitely need to support the use case you have brought to our attention -- recovery mode. Best wishes, Paul On 9/19/06, Heinz Drews <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Chris, > > I agree that with Ajax sufficient functionality can be provided in a webapp. > My primary argument for a rich client would be as I have said before > that a webapp requires a running server. And what should be done if > there are problems in the configuration which prevents that the server > starts? > > The console webapp should at least run in a seperate server with > minimalistic configuration. > Something which I would prefer anyhow instead of the current situation in G. > > Heinz > > On 9/19/06, Christopher M. Cardona <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I think this idea can be explored but we should give the current > > initiative to include Ajax functionality to the console a shot first. > > There's no doubt that rich clients have their advantages over web apps > > (performance and sophisticated widgets to name a few) but I think we > > have a potential in Ajax to close this gap. It would be nice to get more > > comments on this. What do others think? > > > > > > Jason Dillon wrote: > > > Anyone have any thoughts on using Swing for the console... instead of > > > a webapp (which are kinda evil IMO)... and then using webstart to > > > serve it? Maybe using Netbeans (or that license not ASL friendly)? > > > I've done some work with NB before at it would be very easy to create > > > a rich user experience... and its easy to drop in new modules to > > > support different aspects of administration and monitoring. > > > > > > I dunno.. just a thought... > > > > > > --jason > > > > > > > >
Re: Swing console?
Agreed. Aside from the UI aspect, managing a server from within the server process is limited by definition. Ideally there should be a rich client and some kind of server-side daemon that can bounce the server process and provide access to configuration when the server is down. One other advantage would be an ability to manage multiple instances of Geronimo from the single console. From the recent experience the lack of this capability is the single biggest concern in migrating to Geronimo from commercial app servers. Andrus On Sep 19, 2006, at 2:30 AM, Heinz Drews wrote: Chris, I agree that with Ajax sufficient functionality can be provided in a webapp. My primary argument for a rich client would be as I have said before that a webapp requires a running server. And what should be done if there are problems in the configuration which prevents that the server starts? The console webapp should at least run in a seperate server with minimalistic configuration. Something which I would prefer anyhow instead of the current situation in G. Heinz On 9/19/06, Christopher M. Cardona <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I think this idea can be explored but we should give the current initiative to include Ajax functionality to the console a shot first. There's no doubt that rich clients have their advantages over web apps (performance and sophisticated widgets to name a few) but I think we have a potential in Ajax to close this gap. It would be nice to get more comments on this. What do others think? Jason Dillon wrote: > Anyone have any thoughts on using Swing for the console... instead of > a webapp (which are kinda evil IMO)... and then using webstart to > serve it? Maybe using Netbeans (or that license not ASL friendly)? > I've done some work with NB before at it would be very easy to create > a rich user experience... and its easy to drop in new modules to > support different aspects of administration and monitoring. > > I dunno.. just a thought... > > --jason >
Re: Swing console?
You raise an excellent point, which is that all that functionality in the console doesn't do much good if the server won't start. I also really like your idea that the console should be able to run in a server with a minimalistic configuration. To me this is analogous to booting an operating system in recovery mode so you can make repairs using the console before rebooting in normal mode. I think this could be accomplished by providing a specialized config, say var/config/minimal-config.xml, that would get loaded if you passed a special flag to geronimo.sh. The console is not currently implemented in such a way that would allow this because it uses Geronimo's dependency system to gain the level of access it needs to administer a module. e.g. its deployment plan has a dependency against geronimo-activemq-gbean so that it can manage ActiveMQ. As a result ActiveMQ needs to be running before the console can start But with all the excitement around Little G and modularizing the server via plugins we've been talking about changing this so that the console can manage incremental bits of function. As part of that effort I think that we definitely need to support the use case you have brought to our attention -- recovery mode. Best wishes, Paul On 9/19/06, Heinz Drews <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Chris, I agree that with Ajax sufficient functionality can be provided in a webapp. My primary argument for a rich client would be as I have said before that a webapp requires a running server. And what should be done if there are problems in the configuration which prevents that the server starts? The console webapp should at least run in a seperate server with minimalistic configuration. Something which I would prefer anyhow instead of the current situation in G. Heinz On 9/19/06, Christopher M. Cardona <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I think this idea can be explored but we should give the current > initiative to include Ajax functionality to the console a shot first. > There's no doubt that rich clients have their advantages over web apps > (performance and sophisticated widgets to name a few) but I think we > have a potential in Ajax to close this gap. It would be nice to get more > comments on this. What do others think? > > > Jason Dillon wrote: > > Anyone have any thoughts on using Swing for the console... instead of > > a webapp (which are kinda evil IMO)... and then using webstart to > > serve it? Maybe using Netbeans (or that license not ASL friendly)? > > I've done some work with NB before at it would be very easy to create > > a rich user experience... and its easy to drop in new modules to > > support different aspects of administration and monitoring. > > > > I dunno.. just a thought... > > > > --jason > > > >
Re: Swing console?
I think that moving to a swing based console at this point in time would be the wrong move. As Chris and Paul have mentioned, Ajax and other technologies are moving toward closing the function/usability gap for web based applications. A web based console provides greater flexibility for administration from various device types in the future. And rich clients introduce another whole set of client issues that we then have to consider. Technologies like JWS do help with the install/mgmt of the clients but don't address other client side issues such as verification on multiple (sometimes obscure) platforms, JRE versions on the client, hardware requirements, etc... I agree with the exposure that Heinz has pointed out of running the admin console on the same platform that it is managing. However I think we need to view the admin console within the complete context of Geronimo. The console is a great usability enhancement in managing Geronimo and for most users is the primary way that they will manage Geronimo. However, it is not (and should not) be the only management tool. Anything that is possible with the web console should also be possible (but not necessarily as easy) via some some other means. It would be good if we could insulate the console further from the server (possibly running it on it's own minimal configuration as Greg mentioned) but we need to consider the server cost/benefit trade-off any such choices. Joe Heinz Drews wrote: Chris, I agree that with Ajax sufficient functionality can be provided in a webapp. My primary argument for a rich client would be as I have said before that a webapp requires a running server. And what should be done if there are problems in the configuration which prevents that the server starts? The console webapp should at least run in a seperate server with minimalistic configuration. Something which I would prefer anyhow instead of the current situation in G. Heinz On 9/19/06, Christopher M. Cardona <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I think this idea can be explored but we should give the current initiative to include Ajax functionality to the console a shot first. There's no doubt that rich clients have their advantages over web apps (performance and sophisticated widgets to name a few) but I think we have a potential in Ajax to close this gap. It would be nice to get more comments on this. What do others think? Jason Dillon wrote: > Anyone have any thoughts on using Swing for the console... instead of > a webapp (which are kinda evil IMO)... and then using webstart to > serve it? Maybe using Netbeans (or that license not ASL friendly)? > I've done some work with NB before at it would be very easy to create > a rich user experience... and its easy to drop in new modules to > support different aspects of administration and monitoring. > > I dunno.. just a thought... > > --jason >
Re: Swing console?
Chris, I agree that with Ajax sufficient functionality can be provided in a webapp. My primary argument for a rich client would be as I have said before that a webapp requires a running server. And what should be done if there are problems in the configuration which prevents that the server starts? The console webapp should at least run in a seperate server with minimalistic configuration. Something which I would prefer anyhow instead of the current situation in G. Heinz On 9/19/06, Christopher M. Cardona <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I think this idea can be explored but we should give the current initiative to include Ajax functionality to the console a shot first. There's no doubt that rich clients have their advantages over web apps (performance and sophisticated widgets to name a few) but I think we have a potential in Ajax to close this gap. It would be nice to get more comments on this. What do others think? Jason Dillon wrote: > Anyone have any thoughts on using Swing for the console... instead of > a webapp (which are kinda evil IMO)... and then using webstart to > serve it? Maybe using Netbeans (or that license not ASL friendly)? > I've done some work with NB before at it would be very easy to create > a rich user experience... and its easy to drop in new modules to > support different aspects of administration and monitoring. > > I dunno.. just a thought... > > --jason >
Re: Swing console?
I think this idea can be explored but we should give the current initiative to include Ajax functionality to the console a shot first. There’s no doubt that rich clients have their advantages over web apps (performance and sophisticated widgets to name a few) but I think we have a potential in Ajax to close this gap. It would be nice to get more comments on this. What do others think? Jason Dillon wrote: Anyone have any thoughts on using Swing for the console... instead of a webapp (which are kinda evil IMO)... and then using webstart to serve it? Maybe using Netbeans (or that license not ASL friendly)? I've done some work with NB before at it would be very easy to create a rich user experience... and its easy to drop in new modules to support different aspects of administration and monitoring. I dunno.. just a thought... --jason
Re: Swing console?
There's currently some momentum towards adding more AJAX functionality to the console which may address some of your concerns. I would really like to get your feedback on GERONIMO-2333. I'm excited about seeing more functionality like this in the console. Do you think this is a good direction for us to go? One advantage to using a webapp vs. an application deployed and managed via webstart, Eclipse or NB is that it allows us to test and improve the same J2EE and plugin framework that many apps deployed in Geronimo will use. If we can do it right then it's a great way to show how powerful Geronimo can be. To me that's an extremely compelling reason to continue investing in the web interface. I also think it's great to provide a solution that runs in the server and keeps the client footprint to a minimum. But that doesn't mean there aren't a multitude of advantages to providing consoles based on other platforms. I hope we can continue to collect input from that point of view. Best wishes, Paul On 9/17/06, Jason Dillon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Anyone have any thoughts on using Swing for the console... instead of a webapp (which are kinda evil IMO)... and then using webstart to serve it? Maybe using Netbeans (or that license not ASL friendly)? I've done some work with NB before at it would be very easy to create a rich user experience... and its easy to drop in new modules to support different aspects of administration and monitoring. I dunno.. just a thought... --jason
Re: Swing console?
That is a good suggestion. I agree with your opinion about webapps. Especially during development it seems, that using a component to configure the component which it is dependent on, is increasing risks. I had several times to manually modify config.xml to get G started again Personally I would prefer an application based on Eclipse because this could be nicely integrated with the plugin for launching G. Heinz On 9/17/06, Jason Dillon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Anyone have any thoughts on using Swing for the console... instead of a webapp (which are kinda evil IMO)... and then using webstart to serve it? Maybe using Netbeans (or that license not ASL friendly)? I've done some work with NB before at it would be very easy to create a rich user experience... and its easy to drop in new modules to support different aspects of administration and monitoring. I dunno.. just a thought... --jason
Re: Swing console?
I am +1 on the general idea. For all its flaws, Swing/webstart is great for that type of applications. I only suggest replacing "instead of a webapp" with "as an alternative to a webapp", at least until there is something usable to do a comparison. Regarding the plugin engine to power it, we had a long discussion on Cayenne list what engine to use for the next generation of our ORM modeler tool. Our desire was to make it as easy and lightweight as possible. We decided to stay away from heavier Eclipse, NetBeans and OSGi engines in favor of a more lightweight environment. Our current winner is Platonos [2] - the framework jar is only 64k, you can't beat that. I did some prototyping [1] of a Platonos/Swing engine, although that's too raw yet. And I can certainly help on the engine side if this idea gains traction. Andrus [1] http://objectstyle.org/cayenne/lists/cayenne-devel/2006/06/0026.html [2] http://sourceforge.net/projects/platonos On Sep 17, 2006, at 4:42 PM, Jason Dillon wrote: Anyone have any thoughts on using Swing for the console... instead of a webapp (which are kinda evil IMO)... and then using webstart to serve it? Maybe using Netbeans (or that license not ASL friendly)? I've done some work with NB before at it would be very easy to create a rich user experience... and its easy to drop in new modules to support different aspects of administration and monitoring. I dunno.. just a thought... --jason
