Web Based Control; OpenDS Control Center

[Ersin Er <er...@gmail.com>]

Hi,

We need some sort of Web based configuration at some point. Although
Configuration in DIT is cool, some tasks are better handled with a Web
based UI. Here is a mock of OpenDS Web Control Center:

https://opends.dev.java.net/nonav/public/docs/ui-docs/mockups/html/

It looks like SunDS's current DSCC application.

-- 
Ersin Er

R.A. and Ph.D Student at the Dept. of Computer Eng. in Hacettepe University
http://www.cs.hacettepe.edu.tr

Committer and PMC Member of The Apache Directory Project
http://directory.apache.org

Re: Web Based Control; OpenDS Control Center

[Emmanuel Lecharny <el...@apache.org>]

Chris Custine a écrit :

> <snip/>
>
>>
>> Sounds good and I hope you don't think I am shooting down your idea.  
>> I do
>> think it is a good one but it just comes down to prioritization, time to
>> market (can't believe I just used this term on an OS mailing list :) 
>> ), and
>> the impact that will result.  I do want to do it though but the when 
>> and the
>> how is what I am concerned with.
>>
>
> No, I know you aren't shutting it down.  I also think that some of the
> features I am thinking about are crossing over into the IDM realm anyway
> (delegated user management, custom user friendly screens, etc.), so thats
> why I think it is a pretty big discussion.  I just didn't want to leave
> Ersin stranded on his first email since I had some similar ideas.

Guys, you both have really good ideas. So does Ersin. My personal 
opinion is that having a Web UI + a RCP GUI would be the best solution. 
But when I look at the schedule, that's a different story :)

Alex is right when he says that a configuration GUI is mainly used by 
admins, which has almost all the wanted accesses on their computers. But 
Chris is also right, because you have so many hurdles in front of you 
when it comes to install an application on your computer in big 
companies ... Plus the fact that asking for a new protocol and port 
being allowed on the firewall can be simply impossible sometime...

Damn, this is a complex world !

What about slowing down the planet rotation speed to 48 hours ?

Emmanuel

Re: Web Based Control; OpenDS Control Center

[Ersin Er <er...@gmail.com>]

On 6/4/07, Chris Custine <ch...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 6/4/07, Alex Karasulu <ak...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > Hi Chris,
> >
> >
> > On 6/3/07, Chris Custine < chris.custine@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > I have been thinking about a web based admin app for quite some time as
> well...  I think maybe we are even talking about 2 different things here
> (basic internal admin app and larger enterprise admin app).  I have even
> gotten to the point of thinking that the basic embedded Jetty app that you
> are already discussing should be part of the OSS project, but maybe a larger
> Enterprise app is a seperate thing altogether, almost like Studio (maybe
> Studio Web).
> >
> >
> > Yes this is certainly a possibility.  Let's not close the door on this but
> I do not think such a
> > large application should be hosted directly on the ApacheDS server's Jetty
> service.  Perhaps
> > The hooks could be placed on the ApacheDS instance via web services or
> some other
> > management interface like LDAP or JMX.  Then this studio web app could be
> an application
> > deployed on a standalone web server.
> >
> >
> > > I think we are obviously occupied with many other more important things
> at the moment, but I can tell you that my experience with client preference
> has been the opposite of yours.  My larger clients would count a web based
> admin app as a postitive feature, and an installed GUI as a negative in
> product assesment.  This is mainly due to the strict deployment and
> evaluation policies for desktop applications since neither of them allow
> direct install of software and require automated software push for inventory
> and license control, even for niche admin apps like this.
> >
> >
> > You're totally right Chris.  Big companies lock down desktops but do they
> do it for those
> > select few power users like administrators that will be the ones using the
> studio application.
> >
> > My reason for not thinking too highly of using a web based administration
> application
> > stems from this fact.  Of the population of employees in the company a
> very small fraction
> > of power users (administrators) will be using this application.  From my
> understanding
> > one of the main strengths of a web based application is in providing
> access to a large
> > population of users without having to deploy it on their desktops along
> with centralized
> > administration and maintenance.  Here we're going to only have a small
> population of users
> > and hence I feel a web application might be overkill.
> >
> > There might be another slightly larger population of non-administrator
> type users like
> > developers which may use Studio to develop schema or stored procedures.
> Most companies
> > now use Eclipse for development.  Studio as an eclipse tool can be added
> to an existing
> > Eclipse installation as a set of plugins without requiring the need for
> such approvals to install
> > new applications.  Meaning the plugin update process in eclipse will not
> require the developer
> > to request the installation of a new application on their workstation.
> >
> > But I do agree some organizations will still insist on having a web based
> platform for this.  This
> > is why I'm not abandoning the idea but for me it is merely a matter of
> prioritization.  I think we
> > can get by with an Eclipse RCP application for a while.  Having a web
> based Studio will be
> > a great thing to have but not required.
> >
> > I think SUN is writing a OpenDS web application because they're stinkers
> when it comes to
> > using Eclipse.  This is one of the reasons why they chose a web based
> administration console
> > since they X'd the option to use eclipse.
> >
> > Also note that building a Web application verses a fat client is a bit
> more involved.
> >
> >    (1) server apps must run forever and leaks can add up whereas client
> apps are restarted
> >    (2) lots more moving parts in a webapp
> >    (3) webapp dev is less agile than fat client development
> >
> > I think if we mature the RCP based Studio fat client rapidly through user
> input and solidify the
> > feature that are deemed the most useful then we have a great set of
> requirements already
> > in hand for building the web based studio application.  Knocking it out
> then will be much easier
> > since the requirements are clear and all we need to do is apply some
> mechanics to whip it
> > together.
> >
> >
> > > Anyway, this is a complicated discussion, but at some point I would like
> to re-visit this when we can give it more time.  I have a long list of
> features that I have been building in my head, so maybe at some point we can
> document some ideas and evaluate it from there?
> >
> >
> > Sounds good and I hope you don't think I am shooting down your idea.  I do
> think it is a good one but it just comes down to prioritization, time to
> market (can't believe I just used this term on an OS mailing list :) ), and
> the impact that will result.  I do want to do it though but the when and the
> how is what I am concerned with.
>
> No, I know you aren't shutting it down.  I also think that some of the
> features I am thinking about are crossing over into the IDM realm anyway
> (delegated user management, custom user friendly screens, etc.), so thats
> why I think it is a pretty big discussion.  I just didn't want to leave
> Ersin stranded on his first email since I had some similar ideas.
>  Some day....  :-)

Hey Chris, thanks :-)

BTW, A administrator may not always have a Studio close to him but a
web ui will always work, at least for some task.

And again BTW, I don't want to be seen as against Studio. I am a great
fan of it since the first day I met ;-)

> Chris
>
> >
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Alex
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>


-- 
Ersin Er

R.A. and Ph.D Student at the Dept. of Computer Eng. in Hacettepe University
http://www.cs.hacettepe.edu.tr

Committer and PMC Member of The Apache Directory Project
http://directory.apache.org

Re: Web Based Control; OpenDS Control Center

[Chris Custine <ch...@gmail.com>]

On 6/4/07, Alex Karasulu <ak...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> Hi Chris,
>
> On 6/3/07, Chris Custine <ch...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > I have been thinking about a web based admin app for quite some time as
> > well...  I think maybe we are even talking about 2 different things here
> > (basic internal admin app and larger enterprise admin app).  I have even
> > gotten to the point of thinking that the basic embedded Jetty app that you
> > are already discussing should be part of the OSS project, but maybe a larger
> > Enterprise app is a seperate thing altogether, almost like Studio (maybe
> > Studio Web).
>
>
> Yes this is certainly a possibility.  Let's not close the door on this but
> I do not think such a
> large application should be hosted directly on the ApacheDS server's Jetty
> service.  Perhaps
> The hooks could be placed on the ApacheDS instance via web services or
> some other
> management interface like LDAP or JMX.  Then this studio web app could be
> an application
> deployed on a standalone web server.
>
> I think we are obviously occupied with many other more important things at
> > the moment, but I can tell you that my experience with client preference has
> > been the opposite of yours.  My larger clients would count a web based admin
> > app as a postitive feature, and an installed GUI as a negative in product
> > assesment.  This is mainly due to the strict deployment and evaluation
> > policies for desktop applications since neither of them allow direct install
> > of software and require automated software push for inventory and license
> > control, even for niche admin apps like this.
>
>
> You're totally right Chris.  Big companies lock down desktops but do they
> do it for those
> select few power users like administrators that will be the ones using the
> studio application.
>
> My reason for not thinking too highly of using a web based administration
> application
> stems from this fact.  Of the population of employees in the company a
> very small fraction
> of power users (administrators) will be using this application.  From my
> understanding
> one of the main strengths of a web based application is in providing
> access to a large
> population of users without having to deploy it on their desktops along
> with centralized
> administration and maintenance.  Here we're going to only have a small
> population of users
> and hence I feel a web application might be overkill.
>
> There might be another slightly larger population of non-administrator
> type users like
> developers which may use Studio to develop schema or stored procedures.
> Most companies
> now use Eclipse for development.  Studio as an eclipse tool can be added
> to an existing
> Eclipse installation as a set of plugins without requiring the need for
> such approvals to install
> new applications.  Meaning the plugin update process in eclipse will not
> require the developer
> to request the installation of a new application on their workstation.
>
> But I do agree some organizations will still insist on having a web based
> platform for this.  This
> is why I'm not abandoning the idea but for me it is merely a matter of
> prioritization.  I think we
> can get by with an Eclipse RCP application for a while.  Having a web
> based Studio will be
> a great thing to have but not required.
>
> I think SUN is writing a OpenDS web application because they're stinkers
> when it comes to
> using Eclipse.  This is one of the reasons why they chose a web based
> administration console
> since they X'd the option to use eclipse.
>
> Also note that building a Web application verses a fat client is a bit
> more involved.
>
>    (1) server apps must run forever and leaks can add up whereas client
> apps are restarted
>    (2) lots more moving parts in a webapp
>    (3) webapp dev is less agile than fat client development
>
> I think if we mature the RCP based Studio fat client rapidly through user
> input and solidify the
> feature that are deemed the most useful then we have a great set of
> requirements already
> in hand for building the web based studio application.  Knocking it out
> then will be much easier
> since the requirements are clear and all we need to do is apply some
> mechanics to whip it
> together.
>
> Anyway, this is a complicated discussion, but at some point I would like
> > to re-visit this when we can give it more time.  I have a long list of
> > features that I have been building in my head, so maybe at some point we can
> > document some ideas and evaluate it from there?
>
>
> Sounds good and I hope you don't think I am shooting down your idea.  I do
> think it is a good one but it just comes down to prioritization, time to
> market (can't believe I just used this term on an OS mailing list :) ), and
> the impact that will result.  I do want to do it though but the when and the
> how is what I am concerned with.
>

No, I know you aren't shutting it down.  I also think that some of the
features I am thinking about are crossing over into the IDM realm anyway
(delegated user management, custom user friendly screens, etc.), so thats
why I think it is a pretty big discussion.  I just didn't want to leave
Ersin stranded on his first email since I had some similar ideas.

Some day....  :-)

Chris

Thanks,
> Alex
>
>
>
>
>
>

Re: Web Based Control; OpenDS Control Center

[Alex Karasulu <ak...@apache.org>]

Hi Chris,

On 6/3/07, Chris Custine <ch...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I have been thinking about a web based admin app for quite some time as
> well...  I think maybe we are even talking about 2 different things here
> (basic internal admin app and larger enterprise admin app).  I have even
> gotten to the point of thinking that the basic embedded Jetty app that you
> are already discussing should be part of the OSS project, but maybe a larger
> Enterprise app is a seperate thing altogether, almost like Studio (maybe
> Studio Web).


Yes this is certainly a possibility.  Let's not close the door on this but I
do not think such a
large application should be hosted directly on the ApacheDS server's Jetty
service.  Perhaps
The hooks could be placed on the ApacheDS instance via web services or some
other
management interface like LDAP or JMX.  Then this studio web app could be an
application
deployed on a standalone web server.

I think we are obviously occupied with many other more important things at
> the moment, but I can tell you that my experience with client preference has
> been the opposite of yours.  My larger clients would count a web based admin
> app as a postitive feature, and an installed GUI as a negative in product
> assesment.  This is mainly due to the strict deployment and evaluation
> policies for desktop applications since neither of them allow direct install
> of software and require automated software push for inventory and license
> control, even for niche admin apps like this.


You're totally right Chris.  Big companies lock down desktops but do they do
it for those
select few power users like administrators that will be the ones using the
studio application.

My reason for not thinking too highly of using a web based administration
application
stems from this fact.  Of the population of employees in the company a very
small fraction
of power users (administrators) will be using this application.  From my
understanding
one of the main strengths of a web based application is in providing access
to a large
population of users without having to deploy it on their desktops along with
centralized
administration and maintenance.  Here we're going to only have a small
population of users
and hence I feel a web application might be overkill.

There might be another slightly larger population of non-administrator type
users like
developers which may use Studio to develop schema or stored procedures.
Most companies
now use Eclipse for development.  Studio as an eclipse tool can be added to
an existing
Eclipse installation as a set of plugins without requiring the need for such
approvals to install
new applications.  Meaning the plugin update process in eclipse will not
require the developer
to request the installation of a new application on their workstation.

But I do agree some organizations will still insist on having a web based
platform for this.  This
is why I'm not abandoning the idea but for me it is merely a matter of
prioritization.  I think we
can get by with an Eclipse RCP application for a while.  Having a web based
Studio will be
a great thing to have but not required.

I think SUN is writing a OpenDS web application because they're stinkers
when it comes to
using Eclipse.  This is one of the reasons why they chose a web based
administration console
since they X'd the option to use eclipse.

Also note that building a Web application verses a fat client is a bit more
involved.

   (1) server apps must run forever and leaks can add up whereas client apps
are restarted
   (2) lots more moving parts in a webapp
   (3) webapp dev is less agile than fat client development

I think if we mature the RCP based Studio fat client rapidly through user
input and solidify the
feature that are deemed the most useful then we have a great set of
requirements already
in hand for building the web based studio application.  Knocking it out then
will be much easier
since the requirements are clear and all we need to do is apply some
mechanics to whip it
together.

Anyway, this is a complicated discussion, but at some point I would like to
> re-visit this when we can give it more time.  I have a long list of features
> that I have been building in my head, so maybe at some point we can document
> some ideas and evaluate it from there?


Sounds good and I hope you don't think I am shooting down your idea.  I do
think it is a good one but it just comes down to prioritization, time to
market (can't believe I just used this term on an OS mailing list :) ), and
the impact that will result.  I do want to do it though but the when and the
how is what I am concerned with.

Thanks,
Alex

Re: Web Based Control; OpenDS Control Center

[Chris Custine <ch...@gmail.com>]

I have been thinking about a web based admin app for quite some time as
well...  I think maybe we are even talking about 2 different things here
(basic internal admin app and larger enterprise admin app).  I have even
gotten to the point of thinking that the basic embedded Jetty app that you
are already discussing should be part of the OSS project, but maybe a larger
Enterprise app is a seperate thing altogether, almost like Studio (maybe
Studio Web).

I think we are obviously occupied with many other more important things at
the moment, but I can tell you that my experience with client preference has
been the opposite of yours.  My larger clients would count a web based admin
app as a postitive feature, and an installed GUI as a negative in product
assesment.  This is mainly due to the strict deployment and evaluation
policies for desktop applications since neither of them allow direct install
of software and require automated software push for inventory and license
control, even for niche admin apps like this.

Anyway, this is a complicated discussion, but at some point I would like to
re-visit this when we can give it more time.  I have a long list of features
that I have been building in my head, so maybe at some point we can document
some ideas and evaluate it from there?

Thanks,
Chris

On 6/3/07, Alex Karasulu <ak...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> I agree with Emmanuel.  Once we have the configuration in the DIT
> administrators (these guys don't like UIs) will just use LDAP to configure
> the server.  Those needing a UI can use Studio to do the job.   RCP is way
> more preferrable than using a web UI in my opinion.
>
> Alex
>
> On 6/3/07, Emmanuel Lecharny <el...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > Ersin Er a écrit :
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > We need some sort of Web based configuration at some point. Although
> > > Configuration in DIT is cool, some tasks are better handled with a Web
> > > based UI. Here is a mock of OpenDS Web Control Center:
> > >
> > > https://opends.dev.java.net/nonav/public/docs/ui-docs/mockups/html/
> > >
> > > It looks like SunDS's current DSCC application.
> > >
> > Well, I think this is not the way we should go.
> >
> > Web based configuration is obviously attractive, but this is only about
> > presentation. We have Apache Directory Studio which gives a much better
> > UI than any web UI. What we only need is to add some HTTP connector to
> > the server, and this is something we almost have, with Jetty integrated
> > into ADS, with the DSML codec. Using those elements will allow us to
> > have a better UI, without spending months building a specific WebApp
> > with all the burden it carries (new port declaration, installing a web
> > application beside the server, etc).
> >
> > Also, I don't think that having a Web based configuration tool is
> > opposed to have all the configuratuon stored in the DIT.
> >
> > The main problem we currently have rightnow is that our configuration is
> > file based, and this is the main issue, IMHO.
> >
> > wdyt ?
> >
> > Emmanuel
> >
>
>

Re: Web Based Control; OpenDS Control Center

[Alex Karasulu <ak...@apache.org>]

I agree with Emmanuel.  Once we have the configuration in the DIT
administrators (these guys don't like UIs) will just use LDAP to configure
the server.  Those needing a UI can use Studio to do the job.   RCP is way
more preferrable than using a web UI in my opinion.

Alex

On 6/3/07, Emmanuel Lecharny <el...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> Ersin Er a écrit :
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > We need some sort of Web based configuration at some point. Although
> > Configuration in DIT is cool, some tasks are better handled with a Web
> > based UI. Here is a mock of OpenDS Web Control Center:
> >
> > https://opends.dev.java.net/nonav/public/docs/ui-docs/mockups/html/
> >
> > It looks like SunDS's current DSCC application.
> >
> Well, I think this is not the way we should go.
>
> Web based configuration is obviously attractive, but this is only about
> presentation. We have Apache Directory Studio which gives a much better
> UI than any web UI. What we only need is to add some HTTP connector to
> the server, and this is something we almost have, with Jetty integrated
> into ADS, with the DSML codec. Using those elements will allow us to
> have a better UI, without spending months building a specific WebApp
> with all the burden it carries (new port declaration, installing a web
> application beside the server, etc).
>
> Also, I don't think that having a Web based configuration tool is
> opposed to have all the configuratuon stored in the DIT.
>
> The main problem we currently have rightnow is that our configuration is
> file based, and this is the main issue, IMHO.
>
> wdyt ?
>
> Emmanuel
>

Re: Web Based Control; OpenDS Control Center

[Emmanuel Lecharny <el...@apache.org>]

Ersin Er a écrit :

> Hi,
>
> We need some sort of Web based configuration at some point. Although
> Configuration in DIT is cool, some tasks are better handled with a Web
> based UI. Here is a mock of OpenDS Web Control Center:
>
> https://opends.dev.java.net/nonav/public/docs/ui-docs/mockups/html/
>
> It looks like SunDS's current DSCC application.
>
Well, I think this is not the way we should go.

Web based configuration is obviously attractive, but this is only about 
presentation. We have Apache Directory Studio which gives a much better 
UI than any web UI. What we only need is to add some HTTP connector to 
the server, and this is something we almost have, with Jetty integrated 
into ADS, with the DSML codec. Using those elements will allow us to 
have a better UI, without spending months building a specific WebApp 
with all the burden it carries (new port declaration, installing a web 
application beside the server, etc).

Also, I don't think that having a Web based configuration tool is 
opposed to have all the configuratuon stored in the DIT.

The main problem we currently have rightnow is that our configuration is 
file based, and this is the main issue, IMHO.

wdyt ?

Emmanuel