Of course, by shipping with no console, stopping development of the current one, and with hawt.io already having a working console, I wonder where we are going to be pointing folks?
On Tue, Jan 7, 2014 at 2:48 PM, Jim Gomes <e.se...@gmail.com> wrote: > +1 the ideas that Claus presented below. I like the idea of a simple > drop-in install and a level playing field for replacement consoles. By > having a default "headless" install, the security of a production > deployment goes way up. > > > On Mon, Jan 6, 2014 at 12:06 AM, Claus Ibsen <claus.ib...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi >> >> I think the old web console should be moved into a sub-project of ActiveMQ. >> Other ASF projects like Felix [1], Karaf [2], etc does this with their >> web-consoles. >> >> That may also make it easier for people to contribute to the >> web-console as a sub-project if there codebase is smaller, and not >> contains the entire ActiveMQ source code. That may spark a little more >> life into the old web-console so people can help maintain it. >> >> For the standalone ActiveMQ distribution, then installing the old web >> console should be an easy step, such as unzipping a .zip file, or >> copying a .war / .jar or something to a directory, and allowing to >> editing a configuration file to configure the console (port / context >> path / or other configurations). Then other 3rd party consoles could >> have the *same* installation procedure, so there is even >> playing-field. >> >> For the embedded ActiveMQ distribution for SMX/Karaf users, its >> already easy to install the console, as its just like any other >> installation using a feature. This is the same for other 3rd party >> consoles, and thus there is already an even playing field. >> >> >> >> >> [1] - >> http://felix.apache.org/documentation/subprojects/apache-felix-web-console.html >> [2] - http://karaf.apache.org/index/subprojects/webconsole.html >> >> >> On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 10:59 AM, Robert Davies <rajdav...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> > The old/original console is no longer fit for purpose, it is hard to >> maintain, the source of a lot of security issues [1] over the last few >> years. >> > >> > There is another thread about using hawtio as the console going forward, >> and without going into all the gory details it is probably likely that >> there may be no web console shipped at all in future releases of ActiveMQ. >> The JMX naming hierarchy was improved for ActiveMQ 5.8, such that its easy >> to view the running status of an ActiveMQ broker from 3rd party tools such >> as jconsole, visualvm or hawtio. Regardless of the outcome of the other >> discussion [2] - It doesn’t help the ActiveMQ project to try and maintain a >> static web console any more. >> > >> > I propose we remove the old web console from the ActiveMQ 5.10 release - >> thoughts ? >> > >> > >> > >> > [1] >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AMQ-2714?jql=project%20%3D%20AMQ%20AND%20text%20~%20%22XSS%22 >> > [2] >> http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/Default-Web-Console-td4675705.html >> > >> > Rob Davies >> > ———————— >> > Red Hat, Inc >> > http://hawt.io - #dontcha >> > Twitter: rajdavies >> > Blog: http://rajdavies.blogspot.com >> > ActiveMQ in Action: http://www.manning.com/snyder/ >> > >> >> >> >> -- >> Claus Ibsen >> ----------------- >> Red Hat, Inc. >> Email: cib...@redhat.com >> Twitter: davsclaus >> Blog: http://davsclaus.com >> Author of Camel in Action: http://www.manning.com/ibsen >> Make your Camel applications look hawt, try: http://hawt.io >>
