Re: Karaf WebConsole

[Andreas Pieber <an...@gmail.com>]

+1 to Guillaume; I also think that this is a quite general project.
But still, using e.g. pax-wicket would allow to define
easy-to-understood OSGi extension points to the UI which should make
the webconsole easier to adapt and extend for more specific use cases
(and e.g. without embedding/adapting the webconsole code) as we do
now. In addition, a framework (such as wicket) would ("automatically")
create a much clearer structure between html, css, js, ... (as Charles
pointed out as a problem)

But would e.g. Felix or Sling use a wicket based webconsole?

Kind regards,
Andreas

On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 10:38 PM, Guillaume Nodet <gn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> The web console has been designed to be very lightweight, and the
> first consequence is of course the fact that by not using a big
> framework, the code is a bit more complicated as you have seen.
>
> If we plan to rewrite one, we need to make sure the benefits outweight
> the drawbacks of rewriting for the sake of it, as if we are to
> rewrite, we will have to actually maintain it, whereas, now, the felix
> community does the maintenance.   Also, i don't think such a console
> is specific to Karaf, so it might very well make sense to look for
> other communities to work together (such as felix, sling, geronimo)
> ...
>
>
> On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 21:06, Charles Moulliard <cm...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> This week-end, I have spend some time on Apache Felix & Karaf
>> WebConsole code. What I have discovered make me very unhappy and
>> frustrated because the project(s) lack of structure, complicate the
>> development of screens and decrease development productivity (html
>> code is mixed in javascript, json variables are set everywhere in the
>> code and use in several of javascript functions, no template is used
>> to render html pages, locale is not used to translate text, ....).
>>
>> I have no idea about what is planned to do for the future (Karaf 3.0),
>> if we will continue to use Apache Felix WebConsole or create our own
>> web console, but a reflexion about which Web frameworks, Ajax
>> Javascript should take place to simplify development lifecycle.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Charles Moulliard
>> Apache Committer
>>
>> Blog : http://cmoulliard.blogspot.com
>> Twitter : http://twitter.com/cmoulliard
>> Linkedin : http://www.linkedin.com/in/charlesmoulliard
>> Skype: cmoulliard
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Guillaume Nodet
> ------------------------
> Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
> ------------------------
> Open Source SOA
> http://fusesource.com
>

Re: Karaf WebConsole

[Guillaume Nodet <gn...@gmail.com>]

I guess one way would be to go to dev@felix.a.o and ask about a
possible rewrite of the console based on pax-wicket.
The sling console is also based on the felix one, so you should be
able to reach everyone involved I'd think.

On Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 07:00, Charles Moulliard <cm...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> If we would like to share our efforts with other communities and avoid
> to reinvent the wheel, that makes sense to capitalise the work made by
> other projects Apache Felix, Sling, ... regarding to WebConsole but my
> first question will be how can we initiate this debate between
> different Apache projects having different team members, boards,
> interests to improve what exist and suggest to Apache Wicket to better
> separate code from display and rendering ? The existing situation
> could also be improved if we decided all together to adopt stricts
> convention but is it possible to do that between Apache Communities.
>
> Remark : pax-wicket is not so trivial to use .....
>
> Regards,
>
> Charles
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 4:32 AM, Andreas Pieber <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> +1 to Guillaume; I also think that this is a quite general project.
>> But still, using e.g. pax-wicket would allow to define
>> easy-to-understood OSGi extension points to the UI which should make
>> the webconsole easier to adapt and extend for more specific use cases
>> (and e.g. without embedding/adapting the webconsole code) as we do
>> now. In addition, a framework (such as wicket) would ("automatically")
>> create a much clearer structure between html, css, js, ... (as Charles
>> pointed out as a problem)
>>
>> But would e.g. Felix or Sling use a wicket based webconsole?
>>
>> Kind regards,
>> Andreas
>>
>> On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 10:38 PM, Guillaume Nodet <gn...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> The web console has been designed to be very lightweight, and the
>>> first consequence is of course the fact that by not using a big
>>> framework, the code is a bit more complicated as you have seen.
>>>
>>> If we plan to rewrite one, we need to make sure the benefits outweight
>>> the drawbacks of rewriting for the sake of it, as if we are to
>>> rewrite, we will have to actually maintain it, whereas, now, the felix
>>> community does the maintenance.   Also, i don't think such a console
>>> is specific to Karaf, so it might very well make sense to look for
>>> other communities to work together (such as felix, sling, geronimo)
>>> ...
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 21:06, Charles Moulliard <cm...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> This week-end, I have spend some time on Apache Felix & Karaf
>>>> WebConsole code. What I have discovered make me very unhappy and
>>>> frustrated because the project(s) lack of structure, complicate the
>>>> development of screens and decrease development productivity (html
>>>> code is mixed in javascript, json variables are set everywhere in the
>>>> code and use in several of javascript functions, no template is used
>>>> to render html pages, locale is not used to translate text, ....).
>>>>
>>>> I have no idea about what is planned to do for the future (Karaf 3.0),
>>>> if we will continue to use Apache Felix WebConsole or create our own
>>>> web console, but a reflexion about which Web frameworks, Ajax
>>>> Javascript should take place to simplify development lifecycle.
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>>
>>>> Charles Moulliard
>>>> Apache Committer
>>>>
>>>> Blog : http://cmoulliard.blogspot.com
>>>> Twitter : http://twitter.com/cmoulliard
>>>> Linkedin : http://www.linkedin.com/in/charlesmoulliard
>>>> Skype: cmoulliard
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Cheers,
>>> Guillaume Nodet
>>> ------------------------
>>> Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
>>> ------------------------
>>> Open Source SOA
>>> http://fusesource.com
>>>
>>
>



-- 
Cheers,
Guillaume Nodet
------------------------
Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
------------------------
Open Source SOA
http://fusesource.com

Re: Karaf WebConsole

[Charles Moulliard <cm...@gmail.com>]

Hi,

If we would like to share our efforts with other communities and avoid
to reinvent the wheel, that makes sense to capitalise the work made by
other projects Apache Felix, Sling, ... regarding to WebConsole but my
first question will be how can we initiate this debate between
different Apache projects having different team members, boards,
interests to improve what exist and suggest to Apache Wicket to better
separate code from display and rendering ? The existing situation
could also be improved if we decided all together to adopt stricts
convention but is it possible to do that between Apache Communities.

Remark : pax-wicket is not so trivial to use .....

Regards,

Charles


On Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 4:32 AM, Andreas Pieber <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
> +1 to Guillaume; I also think that this is a quite general project.
> But still, using e.g. pax-wicket would allow to define
> easy-to-understood OSGi extension points to the UI which should make
> the webconsole easier to adapt and extend for more specific use cases
> (and e.g. without embedding/adapting the webconsole code) as we do
> now. In addition, a framework (such as wicket) would ("automatically")
> create a much clearer structure between html, css, js, ... (as Charles
> pointed out as a problem)
>
> But would e.g. Felix or Sling use a wicket based webconsole?
>
> Kind regards,
> Andreas
>
> On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 10:38 PM, Guillaume Nodet <gn...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> The web console has been designed to be very lightweight, and the
>> first consequence is of course the fact that by not using a big
>> framework, the code is a bit more complicated as you have seen.
>>
>> If we plan to rewrite one, we need to make sure the benefits outweight
>> the drawbacks of rewriting for the sake of it, as if we are to
>> rewrite, we will have to actually maintain it, whereas, now, the felix
>> community does the maintenance.   Also, i don't think such a console
>> is specific to Karaf, so it might very well make sense to look for
>> other communities to work together (such as felix, sling, geronimo)
>> ...
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 21:06, Charles Moulliard <cm...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> This week-end, I have spend some time on Apache Felix & Karaf
>>> WebConsole code. What I have discovered make me very unhappy and
>>> frustrated because the project(s) lack of structure, complicate the
>>> development of screens and decrease development productivity (html
>>> code is mixed in javascript, json variables are set everywhere in the
>>> code and use in several of javascript functions, no template is used
>>> to render html pages, locale is not used to translate text, ....).
>>>
>>> I have no idea about what is planned to do for the future (Karaf 3.0),
>>> if we will continue to use Apache Felix WebConsole or create our own
>>> web console, but a reflexion about which Web frameworks, Ajax
>>> Javascript should take place to simplify development lifecycle.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Charles Moulliard
>>> Apache Committer
>>>
>>> Blog : http://cmoulliard.blogspot.com
>>> Twitter : http://twitter.com/cmoulliard
>>> Linkedin : http://www.linkedin.com/in/charlesmoulliard
>>> Skype: cmoulliard
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Cheers,
>> Guillaume Nodet
>> ------------------------
>> Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
>> ------------------------
>> Open Source SOA
>> http://fusesource.com
>>
>