|
Replies:
8
-
Last Post:
Jul 22, 2008 7:01 PM
by: anilam
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Request feedback on GlassFish V3 Admin Console one pager1
Posted:
Jul 10, 2008 9:08 PM
|
|
|
Hi All,
Please provide us comments/feedback on the proposed admin console changes in Glassfish V3.
An overall document describing this can be found at:
http://wiki.glassfish.java.net/Wiki.jsp?page=GFV3AdminGUIOnePager
Feedback/review period closes 1 weeks from today.
Any comments received after that would not be considered for this release (GlassFish V3 Prelude)
thanks
Anissa.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Request feedback on GlassFish V3 Admin Console one pager1
Posted:
Jul 15, 2008 5:49 PM
in response to: anilam
|
|
|
glassfish@javadesktop.org wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> Please provide us comments/feedback on the proposed admin console changes in Glassfish V3.
> An overall document describing this can be found at:
> http://wiki.glassfish.java.net/Wiki.jsp?page=GFV3AdminGUIOnePager
>
Thanks for writing the spec. Very nice. Here are some comments...
Section 4.1 - Update Center Integration
It is not clear in the spec what is the expected behavior when a new
version of the admingui.war is made available in the UC repository. How
will end user get the updated war? Will you allow end users to not
install the latest war?
Do we need a domain level modules directory for Prelude?
We used to have a "Restart Required" status on console. Are we going to
have that? If yes, will it reflect the restart required status when user
installs a module that requires server restart?
Section 4.1 - Branding Support
Please clarify what will be supported and how. If this is explained in
the pluggability spec, please provide necessary pointers.
Section 4.1 - Web Tier Support
Will there be any support for Grizzly configuration? Please see
http://wiki.glassfish.java.net/Wiki.jsp?page=GrizzlyConfigOnePager
--
Nazrul Islam - (408) 276-6468 - Sun Microsystems, Inc.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@glassfish.dev.java.net
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@glassfish.dev.java.net
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Request feedback on GlassFish V3 Admin Console one pager1
Posted:
Jul 22, 2008 6:32 PM
in response to: Nazrul Islam
|
|
|
> Thanks for writing the spec. Very nice. Here are some
> comments...
>
> Section 4.1 - Update Center Integration
> It is not clear in the spec what is the expected
> behavior when a new
> version of the admingui.war is made available in the
> UC repository. How
> will end user get the updated war? Will you allow end
> users to not
> install the latest war?
We are pulling almost everything from the war to make it into plugins, so the war is basically a skeleton and probably won't need to be updated. However this admingui war will still show up in updatetool as well as in the UC integration page in GUI, and if there is really need to update this war, it still can be done.
>
> Do we need a domain level modules directory for
> Prelude?
No. It has been discussed in the asarch review that any module (including GUI plugin module) will be for the entire server installation, not at the domain level.
>
> We used to have a "Restart Required" status on
> console. Are we going to
> have that? If yes, will it reflect the restart
> required status when user
> installs a module that requires server restart?
There is no way in the IPS package to indicate whether server restart is required, and I was told by Jerome that I can assume all modules download will require server restart. So, yes, the Restart Required status will be presented to user after installation of pkgs.
>
> Section 4.1 - Branding Support
> Please clarify what will be supported and how. If
> this is explained in
> the pluggability spec, please provide necessary
> pointers.
This is part of the pluggability support, http://wiki.glassfish.java.net/Wiki.jsp?page=GFV3PluggabilityOnePager, will also update the one pager.
>
> Section 4.1 - Web Tier Support
> Will there be any support for Grizzly configuration?
> Please see
> http://wiki.glassfish.java.net/Wiki.jsp?page=GrizzlyCo
> nfigOnePager
>
Grizzly configuration was never in the task list of admin console for V3 Prelude release. Request didn't come in when we do the scheduling. However, if AMX API for Grizzly configuration is available 1 week before feature freeze, (ie 7/25), we may still consider it. I don't get any commitment from the backend team though.
Keep in mind that GUI plugin infrastructure is available in the Prelude release. So, if the backend has everything ready, then we can always have the plugin for Grizzly configuration available from the update center at a later time.
> --
> Nazrul Islam - (408) 276-6468 - Sun Microsystems,
> Inc.
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------
> ---------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> users-unsubscribe@glassfish.dev.java.net
> For additional commands, e-mail:
> users-help@glassfish.dev.java.net
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Request feedback on GlassFish V3 Admin Console one pager1
Posted:
Jul 16, 2008 10:43 AM
in response to: anilam
|
|
|
While I can see the advantage of not bundling the console with a bare bones version of Glassfish, I do not agree with the Update Center being the only deployment option to install it. There will need to be some other mechanism available to let administrators install the console on machines without direct internet access.
I also see no mention of the Enterprise tier. Is the "Prelude" edition a web container only?
Finally, will there be documentation and sample projects for folks wishing to "plug in" to the admin console? The console has been an opaque blob to most developers as is.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Request feedback on GlassFish V3 Admin Console one pager1
Posted:
Jul 16, 2008 10:43 AM
in response to: whartung
|
|
|
I would have to agree.
If you make the "mainstream" method of installing the admin console through the update center via the internet, then it is likely that an alternative method for installing the console will have less thought and care put into it (in all likely hood, a secondary manual/offline installation procedure probably wouldn’t get the same amount of attention and be more difficult to use).
It's great that this modular approach is being used to try and dramatically improve the all around speed, but I would think the only real viable solution to the basic issues of configuration is to provide multiple distributions of GF V3 with different modules pre-installed.
For Example:
Lite (no modules)
Lite Admin (only admin console module)
Etc.
Obviously, you don’t want to have 20 editions of app server to download/install. Another thought might be to have the Lite installer with no modules, and an installer package that contains additional modules and has the ability to let the user installing the app server choose which modules are installed.
Alex Sherwin
alex.sherwin@acadiasoft.com
-----Original Message-----
From: glassfish@javadesktop.org [mailto:glassfish@javadesktop.org]
Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2008 1:44 PM
To: users@glassfish.dev.java.net
Subject: Re: Request feedback on GlassFish V3 Admin Console one pager1
While I can see the advantage of not bundling the console with a bare bones version of Glassfish, I do not agree with the Update Center being the only deployment option to install it. There will need to be some other mechanism available to let administrators install the console on machines without direct internet access.
I also see no mention of the Enterprise tier. Is the "Prelude" edition a web container only?
Finally, will there be documentation and sample projects for folks wishing to "plug in" to the admin console? The console has been an opaque blob to most developers as is.
[Message sent by forum member 'whartung' (whartung)]
http://forums.java.net/jive/thread.jspa?messageID=287103
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@glassfish.dev.java.net
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@glassfish.dev.java.net
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@glassfish.dev.java.net
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@glassfish.dev.java.net
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: RE: Request feedback on GlassFish V3 Admin Console one pager1
Posted:
Jul 16, 2008 5:12 PM
in response to: Alex Sherwin
|
|
|
> Obviously, you don’t want to have 20 editions of app
> server to download/install. Another thought might be
> to have the Lite installer with no modules, and an
> installer package that contains additional modules
> and has the ability to let the user installing the
> app server choose which modules are installed.
And, frankly, all this seems like a lot of work to reduce the download footprint. Not that I'm in general favor of "bloat for bloats sake", but is the download size that big of an issue for Glassfish adoption? It's no Jetty, but it's not THAT big, not by todays standards and bandwidth expectations anyway.
I happen to think the current GF install is really straight forward and simple. It it a button click? No, but it's much more flexible and faster (IMHO). It's biggest issue being, perhaps, setting up a Windows service (which I've never done).
Now, that doesn't mean there shouldn't be some mechanism to be able to strip Glassfish. For example, developer wants just the Servlet modules, perhaps for the embedded case, then they should be able to readily create such an "install" (for lack of a better word) from the master.
Does that mean every single module in the update center should be included with GF? No, but, at the moment, most of that stuff is really third party anyway, and not related to the core of glassfish.
I think it has been a feature of, and I believe should be a continued goal, to have Glassfish have a great "Out of box" experience in terms of simplicity of install, and completeness of package.
Power users should have the flexibility to play musical plugins, but out of the box, we should have the full functionality of the system, and it should be "obvious" to downloaders that is what they're getting. Getting presented with a myriad of Glassfish packagings I think is more harm the good, as it confuses new adopters and, even worse, confuses support and forum questions.
Now, when someone says "I have Glassfish 2" we pretty much know what that means without having to enumerate ever single detail. Sometimes it may come down to the build number, but even that's rare.
I don't want to see folks posting "Where's my EJB" because they inadvertently downloaded a "servlet only" version, or somesuch thing. Inevitably it'll take 6 posts to finally figure out that's what the user did.
Another view is compare the "OS X" user experience and expecations to the "Windows Vista XYZ Edition" user experience.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: RE: Request feedback on GlassFish V3 Admin Console one pager1
Posted:
Jul 22, 2008 6:55 PM
in response to: Alex Sherwin
|
|
|
Thanks for the suggestion. Having multiple distributions maybe one of the goals for V3 final release.
Anissa.
>
> It's great that this modular approach is being used
> to try and dramatically improve the all around speed,
> but I would think the only real viable solution to
> the basic issues of configuration is to provide
> multiple distributions of GF V3 with different
> modules pre-installed.
>
> For Example:
>
> Lite (no modules)
> Lite Admin (only admin console module)
>
> Etc.
>
> Obviously, you don’t want to have 20 editions of app
> server to download/install. Another thought might be
> to have the Lite installer with no modules, and an
> installer package that contains additional modules
> and has the ability to let the user installing the
> app server choose which modules are installed.
>
>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Request feedback on GlassFish V3 Admin Console one pager1
Posted:
Jul 22, 2008 6:43 PM
in response to: whartung
|
|
|
Hi, whartung,
Thanks for your feedback.
> While I can see the advantage of not bundling the console with a bare bones version of
> Glassfish, I do not agree with the Update Center being the only deployment option to install
> it. There will need to be some other mechanism available to let administrators install the
> console on machines without direct internet access.
I agree with you that there needs to be other mechanism besides going through update center to get the console. The admingui.war will be available for download and user can manually deploy it.
>
> I also see no mention of the Enterprise tier. Is the "Prelude" edition a web container only?
Yes, Prelude doesn't include Enterprise tier. Please refer to http://wiki.glassfish.java.net/Wiki.jsp?page=GlassFishV3LiteExpressContent for its content.
>
> Finally, will there be documentation and sample projects for folks wishing to "plug in" to the admin
> console? The console has been an opaque blob to most developers as is.
Yes, there will be documentation on how to plugin to GUI. Actually in JavaOne 2008, we have a hands-on-lab that has step-by-step instruction on how to create a plugin for GUI.
thanks
Anissa
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Request feedback on GlassFish V3 Admin Console one pager1
Posted:
Jul 22, 2008 7:01 PM
in response to: anilam
|
|
|
Thanks for everyone for you comments and feedback on the one pager for Admin Console for V3 Prelude release. All your suggestions will be considered seriously.
Please feel free to join our weekly Admin Console iteam meeting, Information can be found on
http://wiki.glassfish.java.net/Wiki.jsp?page=AdminGUI
thanks
Anissa
|
|
|
|
|
java.net RSS
