Thanks again Gus. Lots of people indeed misuse REST so we could go on and on about whether requests are stateless or not in another thread. Let's spare the group.
I think most everyone on this channel would be in agreement with you on separate app. I'll be opening a new ticket and a PR that will document a few things to make it easy for UI devs who know little to no Java how to get started. Ishan, there's some significant UI expertise in the team. Erickson finds his way to open every cookie jar. Erik Hatcher wrote the first version of Blacklight. I've seen Pugh do lots of work on Quepid's UI. Jan and Kevin have done a lot of work, and so have many others. The list goes on, and *likes to work on UI* is a different discussion. Beyond committers because I'm not a committer, I have UI expertise that I can polish off and improve for the sake of my interest and commitment to the community and I like to do it. I've also led UI teams. I can help to steward the effort overall and keep things up to date up to the point where I need to ask one of the committers to help me get changes merged. I'll probably even hire a developer to work on it once we are to that point. ;-) Expertise is not something that should block us but motivate us to expand this community and/or our own skillsets long term. Thank you both and everyone else, Marcus On Wed, Apr 8, 2020, 10:21 AM Gus Heck <gus.h...@gmail.com> wrote: > While running it in an external node does ensure separability, I don't > think it does a good job of addressing my other point of not needing to > manage a 3rd server. It's still a server if it's started by java, and one > still has to ensure it exists, and it will be extra hard to figure out how > to configure it if started by Solr. > > I'm strongly in favor of us having a UI from my perspective as a > consultant it makes discovery of things like their startup parameters and > directories and such very easy (just go to front page of the admin screen), > and it's so much easier to get a customer with security concerns and strict > controls on who can access what (think banks, military, etc) to share a web > session where they drive the UI than to get direct access to machines. > It'll be a lot slower and much lower service to be making people wait while > I craft curl statements to paste into the web session (and then fix > the inevitable typos, or detect when they missed the last char of what I > pasted, etc...). > > I definitely against Solr spawning some other server (node or otherwise) > on it's own and thereby requiring additional system dependencies, or > creating a second process that needs to be configured and properly secured. > To me that's even worse than requiring the UI to run outside of Solr. We > have a perfectly good web container already, and furthermore there's a much > greater likelihood that maintainers will be facile with java/j2ee than > anything else (IMHO). It's great if the framework we choose uses little or > no JSP/Servlet and is modernized with a 100% javascript, templated etc. > front end, but the back end should be java/jetty because we've got lots of > java folks. > > If the back end matters deeply then you're not really programming to > MVC/REST style... > > So there's another $0.02 :) and if you're not careful I'll give you an > entire nickle's worth of ways people misuse/misunderstand the term REST :) > > -Gus > > On Tue, Apr 7, 2020 at 9:06 PM Marcus Eagan <marcusea...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Gus, >> >> Your $.02 are worth a lot more than $.02 USD, so thank you. >> >> By separate app, I think I mean to endorse managed by a Node.js process >> started by NPM. I don’t think that conflicts with what you have proposed. >> The NPM command should be issued by Java || or Bash but I don’t think it >> would add significant overhead. Also, seems like on CI and or precommit >> hooks front end could be sizzled in parallel without adding much overhead. >> >> As for the front end framework, the most important things to consider in >> my view are simplicity and maintainability. We need to do a thorough >> analysis on the ecosystem and issues like the size of a React project vs >> Angular project vs Vue project, but React and Vue certainly have the >> velocity and the hearts if the front end community more than Angular. React >> is MIT license now and for the foreseeable >> future thanks to the power and reach of its developers. >> >> <gus.h...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> +1 for Angular CLI / Typescript since I've fiddled with this in a minor >>> way recently, Also MIT license is super friendly. >>> >>> >> As a disenfranchised volunteer to the project, I also assume voters on >> specific choices like frameworks will be helping build in some respect at >> some point now or in the future. Is that a fair or misguided assumption? >> >> Marcus >> >> On Tue, Apr 7, 2020 at 17:15 Gus Heck <gus.h...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> +1 for Angular CLI / Typescript since I've fiddled with this in a minor >>> way recently, Also MIT license is super friendly. >>> >>> Separate App - hmm... that's got some attraction, but also gives my >>> stomach some churning when I think about solr now requiring management of 3 >>> different servers (solr, something to serve UI and zookeeper). Adding more >>> infrastructure gives me pause with respect to all the smaller >>> installations. I've had several small self funded startup clients and a few >>> clients with existing initial installs that they are outgrowing in places >>> where procuring new machines and new software is a 6-12 mo endeavor and >>> both types seem to squirm when I make suggestions such as running zookeeper >>> separately, (let alone 3 of them). I think separate looks good for medium >>> to large folks or very large companies that **already have** a solr expert >>> on hand, but hurts the small clients and the departments in large orgs that >>> got started with insufficient advice/expertise, so maybe >>> >>> - The UI should be installed by default >>> - it should be easy to remove it, or start with it disabled >>> - it should be self contained and separately downloadable. >>> >>> My recent fiddling included figuring out how to make angular CLI play >>> nice in a J2ee war file structure seen here: >>> https://github.com/nsoft/ns-login >>> >>> By play nice I mean, >>> - build creates a war file that "just works" when installed >>> - Angluar CLI commands work >>> - Angular serve command works (for auto-reloading ui changes, running on >>> port 4200; note the use of proxy to allow it to talk to an already running >>> web container) >>> >>> My $0.02, >>> >>> -Gus >>> >>> On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 11:03 AM Jörn Franke <jornfra...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> I think standalone would be very useful. >>>> I propose Angular with Typescript - it fits to a more data centric >>>> approach with data types etc. >>>> Maybe even two types of UIs - Admin UI and a simple Search UI. >>>> >>>> >>>> Am 06.04.2020 um 16:53 schrieb Jan Høydahl <jan....@cominvent.com>: >>>> >>>> Thanks for kickstarting this and bringing some fresh blood and >>>> enthusiasm :) >>>> >>>> Looks like others have had similar wish for a standalone Solr Admin >>>> App, here’s a quick GitHub search for inspiration: >>>> >>>> https://github.com/savantly-net/solr-admin (Angular, nice >>>> screenshots, 1y old) >>>> https://github.com/kezhenxu94/yasa (vuejs, impressive screenshots, >>>> 2y old) >>>> https://github.com/thereactleague/galaxy (React, no screenshots, 4y >>>> old) >>>> >>>> They all seem abandoned but perhaps a new official effort could bring >>>> their developers in as contributors again? >>>> >>>> the people who work on the Admin UI do not need to be expected to know >>>> the Java workflow, necessarily. This reality widens the net for who can >>>> contribute. >>>> >>>> >>>> Agree. Frontend devs have been a shortage in this project, and if we >>>> can make it easier to attract UI committers who feel at home and productive >>>> with the UI code, that would be a win. On the other hand, if we expect that >>>> the UI will be maintained by regular Java committers, then anything that >>>> makes it easier for them/us to contribute is also a win, like perhaps >>>> strongly-typed. >>>> >>>> Again, thanks Marcus for reviving this topic. Let us all try not to be >>>> overly ambitious here or shoot the initiative down with bikeshedding. It is >>>> far more important to fuel the energy and momentum and get something built >>>> than to remain stuck :) >>>> >>>> Jan >>>> >>>> >>>> 6. apr. 2020 kl. 13:47 skrev Marcus Eagan <m...@marcuseagan.com>: >>>> >>>> Coming back to these existential questions from my phone: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> *Jan Høydahl* >>>> Added 1 hour ago >>>> There are many opinions around admin UI. So I think the best place to >>>> start would be a new mail-thread in dev@ to discuss the way forward. >>>> Before we start a major re-work, we should probably ask ourselves a few >>>> existential questions: >>>> >>>> - Should we turn Amin UI into a standalone app instead of embedded >>>> in Solr? >>>> >>>> >>>> I think it should be a standalone app. There are many advantages gained >>>> from a separation of such concerns. Some of the ones include, the people >>>> who work on the Admin UI do not need to be expected to know the Java >>>> workflow, necessarily. This reality widens the net for who can contribute. >>>> >>>> Testing becomes a lot easier because JS developers are accustomed to >>>> building tests for static assets and self-contained node apps. They >>>> generally know less about testing a bit of JS within a massive Java >>>> project. The test could also run independently for changes that only >>>> affect the front end. Adding test coverage without adding time to tests >>>> sounds awesome. >>>> >>>> There are quite a few tickets over the years that have seemed to >>>> suggest that people want more fine-grained control over the Solr admin UI >>>> overall. Two recent tickets discussed topics like running a Solr Admin app >>>> on only one node and disabling it al together for whatever reason. See: >>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-14014. >>>> >>>> >>>> - What UI framework? Guess anything is better than current EOL, but >>>> will largely depend on who is willing to do the job! >>>> >>>> I’m happy to take this on (and willing to follow through on completing >>>> in my nights and weekends), but I am mostly framework agnostic. My stronge >>>> preference would be React, provided the license is kosher. There was one >>>> blip of “practically unusable for most orgs” a couple years back, but >>>> Facebook made it right really soon after. However, I’m flexible. Angular >>>> (not JS) and Vue are also great. I would recommend we consider Typescript >>>> also because of the size of project and number of strongly-typed devs on >>>> this mailing list. My only reservation with TypeScript, though it may not >>>> apply in this case, is that the supersets of JS have changed a lot more >>>> than the frameworks. While CoffeeScript was an unnecessary layer of >>>> abstraction from my limited perspective, TypeScript might make JS more >>>> embraceable to a list of Java hackers. >>>> >>>> >>>> - Current UI has no test coverage, can we do better with the new UI? >>>> >>>> >>>> It’s imperative.React, Angular, and Vue each make it easy to include >>>> tests. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-12276?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17076204#comment-17076204 >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> -- >>> http://www.needhamsoftware.com (work) >>> http://www.the111shift.com (play) >>> >> -- >> Marcus Eagan >> >> > > -- > http://www.needhamsoftware.com (work) > http://www.the111shift.com (play) >
