3:23 p.m.
FYI, I've started publishing the first posts about the new management web interface:
http://relative-order.blogspot.com/search/label/jboss7
It includes some screenshots and general considerations that went into the current
design.
More to come, stay tuned.
Ike
4:26 p.m.
On 03/10/2011 08:23 AM, Heiko Braun wrote:
FYI, I've started publishing the first posts about the new management web interface:
http://relative-order.blogspot.com/search/label/jboss7
It includes some screenshots and general considerations that went into the current
design.
More to come, stay tuned.
They look great!
--
- DML
5:13 p.m.
On 3/10/11 9:26 AM, David M. Lloyd wrote:
On 03/10/2011 08:23 AM, Heiko Braun wrote:
>
> FYI, I've started publishing the first posts about the new management web
interface:
> http://relative-order.blogspot.com/search/label/jboss7
>
> It includes some screenshots and general considerations that went into the current
design.
> More to come, stay tuned.
They look great!
+1
--
Brian Stansberry
Principal Software Engineer
JBoss by Red Hat
7:48 p.m.
looks great Heiko - any "easy" way to try it out ?
btw. the screenshots seem to only cover multiple server approach, is the standalone
server
view going to be the exact same or "different" ?
/max
On Mar 10, 2011, at 15:23, Heiko Braun wrote:
FYI, I've started publishing the first posts about the new management web interface:
http://relative-order.blogspot.com/search/label/jboss7
It includes some screenshots and general considerations that went into the current
design.
More to come, stay tuned.
Ike
_______________________________________________
jboss-as7-dev mailing list
jboss-as7-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-as7-dev
/max
http://about.me/maxandersen
8:12 p.m.
it's going to be the same, just slimmed down.
but the outermost structure will be retained.
I'll post some screens for the standalone use cases soon.
basically 'profiles' will turn into 'profile' and don't offer the
switch.
server groups will go and be replaced with 'deployments'.
'hosts' will go and eventually replaced with something like 'metrics'.
but I am not 100% sure about this one. I have to figure that out.
but the idea is to offer a smooth transition between standalone and domain.
this means, the conceptual model needs to be similar and the structure be retained.
this is actually where I struggled most, but I believe the current categorization allows
this switch between
standalone and domain without confusing people too much.
Ike
On Mar 10, 2011, at 7:48 PM, Max Rydahl Andersen wrote:
btw. the screenshots seem to only cover multiple server approach, is
the standalone server
view going to be the exact same or "different" ?
8:23 p.m.
On Mar 10, 2011, at 7:48 PM, Max Rydahl Andersen wrote:
looks great Heiko - any "easy" way to try it out ?
yes, it served through the internal hudson instance:
http://hudson.qa.jboss.com/hudson/job/AS7ManagementConsole/ws/standalone/...
You can log in as anybody. It's not yet implemented.
But beware. It's not yet tested on Internet Explorer. I know that it blows up on IE7
at least.
But anything decent like FF, Safari or Chrome should work fine.
Most of it is a no-op, but some things actually work.
Guess you'll figure that out.
What's most interesting to me at this stage, is the question if the most important use
cases
can be figured out easily.
'Easily', as in 'I don't need a manual or help system' for something
like:
- Create a server group
- Configure the JCA subsystem
- Deploy an application
- Create a server configuration on host XYZ
- Launch an instance
- [...]
Ike
10:03 p.m.
On 3/10/11 1:23 PM, Heiko Braun wrote:
But beware. It's not yet tested on Internet Explorer. I know that
it blows up on IE7 at least.
But anything decent like FF, Safari or Chrome should work fine.
ROFL. I like the way you worded that....
--
Jason T. Greene
JBoss, a division of Red Hat
4:42 a.m.
Nice work Heiko! And good progress.
On 10 Mar 2011, at 22:23, Heiko Braun wrote:
FYI, I've started publishing the first posts about the new management web interface:
http://relative-order.blogspot.com/search/label/jboss7
It includes some screenshots and general considerations that went into the current
design.
More to come, stay tuned.
Ike
_______________________________________________
jboss-as7-dev mailing list
jboss-as7-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-as7-dev
9:27 a.m.
I think the task oriented approach is good but what's missing from the current layout
is
some form for visual clue of where you are within the management information tree that the
domain model imposes, or a way to use that to navigate quickly to the particular
Profile/Group/Host
So in the left side below or above the related tasks, a tree like structure showing what
is
being managed:
HostA
Domain Controller
HostB
Host ControlerB
ServerB1 (GroupNameX/ProfileP1)
ServerB2 (GroupNameY/ProfileP2)
HostC
Host ControlerC
ServerC1 (GroupNameX/ProfileP1)
ServerC2 (GroupNameY/ProfileP2)
...
Maybe that view could change depending on which top right tab you choose
(Profile/Group/Hosts)
So the above when choosing Hosts and correspondingly for Profiles and Groups:
Profiles
ProfileP1
ProfileP2
Groups
GroupNameX
GroupNameY
I'd prefer that, instead of the drop list.
On 10/03/2011 16:23, Heiko Braun wrote:
FYI, I've started publishing the first posts about the new management web interface:
http://relative-order.blogspot.com/search/label/jboss7
It includes some screenshots and general considerations that went into the current
design.
More to come, stay tuned.
Ike
_______________________________________________
jboss-as7-dev mailing list
jboss-as7-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-as7-dev
--
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Dimitris Andreadis
Software Engineering Manager
JBoss Application Server
by Red Hat
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://dandreadis.blogspot.com/
10:19 a.m.
On Mar 11, 2011, at 9:27 AM, Dimitris Andreadis wrote:
I think the task oriented approach is good but what's missing
from the current layout is
some form for visual clue of where you are within the management information tree that
the
domain model imposes, or a way to use that to navigate quickly to the particular
Profile/Group/Host
I agree, that it's not very obvious where you are.
But regarding the tree vs pull down suggestion:
I did actually begin with a tree on the left hand side, but then quickly realized on
problem:
The "related tasks" sometimes require a selection first. I.e. you need to chose
a host, before you get to see
it's server configurations and server instances. It's similar with profiles and
subsystems.
Now if you want to reflect this using a tree, you would need to put tasks, that refer to a
prior selection
in that tree structure. For hosts it would look like this:
HostA
+ Server Configurations
- Server 1
- Server 2
+ Server Instances
- Instance 2.1
HostB
+ Server Configurations
- Server 3
- Server 4
+ Server Instances
- Instance 3.1
What's happening is that you replicate elements for each root node.
Not sure if we want to do this. As the number of hosts increases, the tree becomes bigger
and thus the redundant information increases until it might become unusable.
The best thing would be to create a UI prototype for this case.
And then take a decision. It's hard to picture these things until you actually get
your hand on it.
Ike
10:40 a.m.
On Mar 11, 2011, at 9:27 AM, Dimitris Andreadis wrote:
I think the task oriented approach is good but what's missing
from the current layout is
some form for visual clue of where you are within the management information tree that
the
domain model imposes, or a way to use that to navigate quickly to the particular
Profile/Group/Host
Another thing that comes to my mind:
If you take an engineering point of view, i.e. you know the jboss_7_0.xsd, then you tend
to think in terms of a tree structure. But one goal with taking the task oriented
approach,
was to break with this mental model and offer an alternative, that's easier to
consume.
That's the reason I tried to explain it differently in the blog post, by talking about
a layered
configuration instead of a tree. The tree structure seems to be simple on a first glance,
but it's not very good at explaining that configuration properties are inherited from
other elements in the tree.
I.e. system properties across profile, groups and hosts.
This inheritance (or layered structure) also implies a certain order:
I.e. you need to create a server group, before you can reference it in a server
configuration.
Now I don't want to take this discussion to far, plus I might turn out to be wrong,
but we should aim for a simple
mental model that works for most users. IMO layered works better then tree structured. But
at the end one or the other need
to be reflected within the UI.
I guess this is the reason why I got away from using a tree on the left hand side.
Ike
11:11 a.m.
I know it is not easy, but I think you need to try and combine both models. The task
oriented approach layered on top or connected somehow with an underlying tree model.
Every other management tool out there has some notion of tree view or resources, it's
hard
to get completely away from it, administrators will be confused. Instinctively, you look
at
the console and try to answer the question where am I now, compared to the full picture,
or
even, what is the full picture in the first place, that I can drill into.
I may be biased, because I worked on network management systems for a long time before
joining jboss, where the concept of the tree is universal. Especially on bigger systems,
like the one we are trying to depict now with the domain model.
On 11/03/2011 11:40, Heiko Braun wrote:
On Mar 11, 2011, at 9:27 AM, Dimitris Andreadis wrote:
> I think the task oriented approach is good but what's missing from the current
layout is
> some form for visual clue of where you are within the management information tree
that the
> domain model imposes, or a way to use that to navigate quickly to the particular
> Profile/Group/Host
Another thing that comes to my mind:
If you take an engineering point of view, i.e. you know the jboss_7_0.xsd, then you tend
to think in terms of a tree structure. But one goal with taking the task oriented
approach,
was to break with this mental model and offer an alternative, that's easier to
consume.
That's the reason I tried to explain it differently in the blog post, by talking
about a layered
configuration instead of a tree. The tree structure seems to be simple on a first
glance,
but it's not very good at explaining that configuration properties are inherited from
other elements in the tree.
I.e. system properties across profile, groups and hosts.
This inheritance (or layered structure) also implies a certain order:
I.e. you need to create a server group, before you can reference it in a server
configuration.
Now I don't want to take this discussion to far, plus I might turn out to be wrong,
but we should aim for a simple
mental model that works for most users. IMO layered works better then tree structured.
But at the end one or the other need
to be reflected within the UI.
I guess this is the reason why I got away from using a tree on the left hand side.
Ike
--
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Dimitris Andreadis
Software Engineering Manager
JBoss Application Server
by Red Hat
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://dandreadis.blogspot.com/
11:18 a.m.
On Mar 11, 2011, at 11:11 AM, Dimitris Andreadis wrote:
Every other management tool out there has some notion of tree view or
resources, it's hard to get completely away from it, administrators will be confused.
Instinctively, you look at the console and try to answer the question where am I now,
compared to the full picture, or even, what is the full picture in the first place, that I
can drill into.
I may be biased, because I worked on network management systems for a long time before
joining jboss, where the concept of the tree is universal. Especially on bigger systems,
like the one we are trying to depict now with the domain model.
I agree that people might be used to it. Let me finish the current milestone with what we
have.
I'll take a look at improving it in the next iteration.
Ike
4788
days inactive
4789
days old
12 comments
7 participants
participants (7)
-
Brian Stansberry -
Bruno Georges -
David M. Lloyd -
Dimitris Andreadis -
Heiko Braun -
Jason T. Greene -
Max Rydahl Andersen