[1] +1 This would let users choose which console they want. [2] -1 I think having 2 distros would just add confusion for end users. [3] 0 As long as it's ActiveMQ branded, then it works for me. [4] -1 The original console is a liability that I'd rather not carry anymore.
On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 8:33 AM, Robert Davies <rajdav...@gmail.com> wrote: > I want to take a straw poll to see where everyone stands, because opinion has > varied, mine included. Straw polls can be a useful tool to move towards > consensus. This isn’t a formal vote, but to reduce the noise, can we keep it > to binding votes only ? > > > 1. Have one distribution with no default console, but make it easy to deploy > a console on demand (the original console - or 3rd party ones). > 2. Have two separate distributions, one with no console - and have a second > distribution with the original console > 3. One distribution, with hawtio as the console - ActiveMQ branded. > 4. One distribution, but uses the original ActiveMQ console only. > > Here’s my vote: > > [1]. +1 > [2] 0 > [3] 0 > [4] -1 > > thanks, > > Rob > -- Hiram Chirino Engineering | Red Hat, Inc. hchir...@redhat.com | fusesource.com | redhat.com skype: hiramchirino | twitter: @hiramchirino blog: Hiram Chirino's Bit Mojo
