Re: [Hawkular-dev] Hawkular Metrics + Hawkular Alerts - Phase 0

Hello Thomas, So far there is no concrete proposal, only why things should not be done; which equates to inaction. I am not the most imaginative person on the planet so I might fail on that front, but I think the plan that I proposed had some cohesion and it was forward looking. Here is a good course of action: 1) Propose something new; completely new or partially new 2) Get the majority of the group (Metrics + Alerts teams) to agree on the path 3) Create the plan to accomplish it and lead the group to implement the plan

Thank you, Stefan Negrea ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Thomas Segismont" <tsegismo(a)redhat.com&gt; > To: hawkular-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > Sent: Monday, November 9, 2015 10:43:26 AM > Subject: Re: [Hawkular-dev] Hawkular Metrics + Hawkular Alerts - Phase 0 > > Le 09/11/2015 16:48, Stefan Negrea a écrit : >> Hello, >> >> That document uses what is already implemented as a base. Phase 0 (a >> prototype phase) should take the current implementation to the next level. >> All the things in the document where logical increments to what we have >> today. The goal was to have a quick Phase 0 to build something that we can >> get feedback on. > > The use case detailed in the example is already possible with a Hawkular > server. > > I don't understand what taking the "current implementation to the next > level" means. > >> >> As for the requirements, there are no requirement and there will probably >> be very little requirements. There is no external entity to give us some >> requirements at this stage. If you consider that what is proposed in the >> document is wrong, I open to suggestions. However, I caution against >> inaction or slow action. >> > > The use case detailed in the document is fine. But there's no need to > prototype an integration if it already exists. > >> Whatever we do should follow two basic principles: >> 1) Fast phase, 2-3 weeks of development >> 2) Build something simple that enables more complicated features in the >> future >> > > I have yet to see a feature which requires to rebuild a new integration > mechanism. > >> >> More replies inline below .... >> >> >> Thank you, >> Stefan >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: "Thomas Segismont" <tsegismo(a)redhat.com&gt; >>> To: hawkular-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >>> Sent: Monday, November 9, 2015 9:16:48 AM >>> Subject: Re: [Hawkular-dev] Hawkular Metrics + Hawkular Alerts - Phase 0 >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> Phase 0 is already implemented: >>> - Metrics can receive data over HTTP >>> - Metrics can publish inserted data to the bus >>> - Webhooks can be created/configured via the Alerts API >>> - Alerts is able to consume data from the bus >> >> That is not what the document states as goals for Phase 0. As the document >> is written what you described is a prerequisite for Phase 0. > > From Google docs: > "This document has two parts. First are the details about how to > exchange data between the two services. And then, there is a description > of a simple feature that can showcase the integration." > > 1. Data exchange between the two services is already implemented. > 2. The user facing feature is already possible with a Hawkular server. > > So phase 0 is over. Period. > >> >>> >>> I can't see why we need to expose an endpoint in Metrics API to setup a >>> set of conditions in Alerts. The Alerts API does the job. >> >> Disconnected APIs are not an integrated solutions. Just as an example, the >> are issues with the maturity of the APIs on both ends. Until we go through >> the exercise of trying to integrate the two in a user facing feature we >> will not see the differences or be able to provide something meaningful to >> users. > > What does disconnected mean? That they are not implemented by the same > software component? In this case it's not a problem. > > The webhook API won't be more mature because it's re-written from Alerts > into Metrics. Maybe I missed your point. > > Integration of Alerts and Metrics has been demonstrated and used this > very afternoon at Devoxx by Clément in the vertx workshop. I'd bet no > attendee (other than Juca) did notice there was 2 software components > behind the service. > > Truth is the scenario described in the document lacks an integration > test. I believe this could be added to: > https://github.com/hawkular/hawkular/tree/master/modules/end-to-end-test > >> >>> >>> Do you already know the use cases for Phase 1? >> >> There are no requirements, and probably there will be no requirements in >> the next month (or even more). That is not the way to approach this. > > From my POV, the way to approach this is to write documentation and > tests for all the awesome features which already work but people > (including in our community) aren't aware of. > _______________________________________________ > hawkular-dev mailing list > hawkular-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hawkular-dev > _______________________________________________ hawkular-dev mailing list hawkular-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hawkular-dev