On 29.04.2016 12:00, Heiko W.Rupp wrote:
As I said before: I believe that to be attractive for community, a
needs to pass the "I can get it initially going in 5 minutes" test.
From what I understand, we are maintaining a whole set of components,
developing a web UI, building a separate assembler module, adding and
integrating a big third-party component (Keycloak), just to make it easy
for someone to use "hawkular-core-services" in a particular way.
*This* is what is difficult for me to understand. I can't seem to accept
that this 5 minutes test is a purpose, a "why".
In the end, what people will see after this 5 minutes test is not what
Which is/has been given before in all the Hawkular releases.
And which will no longer be true for the hawkular-core-services, as the
user needs to go through a number of additional steps to see something
- install Cassandra
- install some kind of UI (e.g. download + configure Grafana)
- manually supply some data (curl, install wf+agent somewhere(*)
All Hawkular releases so far had the purpose of being a monitoring
platform. As a platform, our solution to the 5 minutes test was to add
an embedded Cassandra and embedded Keycloak. That was our cost for the 5
minute test. Everything else was supposed to be part of the product:
multi tenancy, BTM, Data Mining, charts and so on.
To me, "hawkular-core-services" is essentially a data store. It is
intended to be consumed by platforms "closer" to the end user, like
OpenShift or MiQ. As such, I would expect as much of an UI to it as I
would expect from, say, a PostgreSQL database server: I would certainly
expect a way to manipulate and extract data, but I would *not* expect a
full fledged user-friendly HTML5 snappy web UI.
If our raison d'Être is around core-services, then having this "bloated"
distribution is doing a disfavor: it dilutes the focus we have, it
prevents developers from using the time on our core business and
confuses people who first got in contact with Hawkular.
More important than passing the 5 minute test is to clearly answer "what
is this for and what can it do for me". And *this* is what I still don't
I do not believe that
"It was hard to create, so it should be hard to use"
should be applied.
Nobody said that.