A big +1 from me as well. We have not touched or updated the existing UI for quite some time, which is a bad sign for code health.

I would even be OK with a couple of bigger initial code dumps. I am not really a web-developer, so a working piece of code to play around with would probably be the fastest way to get up to speed with the tech and its usage in Aurora.

Thanks a lot for driving this, David!

On 21.07.17, 07:00, "Kai Huang" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

    David - Sure, let's sync on the work when you are ready.
    From: David McLaughlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
    Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2017 14:10
    Subject: Re: Redesign of the Aurora UI
    Thanks for the feedback!
    Joshua - I haven't tried to drop in Preact yet, but I was also planning to
    throw away the prototype and starting again when it came to upstreaming it,
    so as part of that we can just address incompatibilities as we go. If I was
    to guess, then the only significant impact on my prototype would probably
    be the reactable plugin I was using (replacement for Angular's
    smart-table). But longer term I do have concerns about moving away from
    what is a constantly improving and healthy ecosystem around React. So most
    likely I'll hold off until a decision is made there one way or the other
    (which should be within a week).
    Kai - I'd be happy to coordinate and collaborate on this with others. Let
    me try and finish up the CSS/UX of the pages in my prototype and from there
    we can sync on who does what. Does that sound good?
    On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 1:56 PM, Kai Huang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
    > Just a few thoughts as an aurora developer and operator:
    > From my experiences with Aurora users, some persisting complaints are:
    >   1.  The current UI is not very intuitive for the users to understand the
    > task lifecycle, resource utilization of their job.
    >   2.  Often times users are unaware of the new features/changes in Aurora
    > Scheduler/Executor, which leads to a lot of misuse of the system.
    >   3.  Users have preferences on the appearance of the scheduler/thermos UI
    > due to special use cases, and ask us to customize for them(or start to
    > write their own UI, which is often not recommended).
    > The other major issue I see in the current UI is that it's built on an
    > obsolete tech stack(AngularJS) that has all the binaries and dependencies
    > in the repo. From a developer's perspective, it's a big burden to
    > maintain/test the code, and make fast iterations on it.
    > Currently the scheduler UI is readonly, and mainly designed for debugging
    > purposes. We could have done much better to make the UI more friendly to
    > the end user, empower them to discover, understand and use all the Aurora
    > features, and give them more insights into the their jobs, or even the
    > entire cluster. I love the idea that redesign the UI with a modern stack,
    > and more importantly, every single part of the application is a module that
    > you could take your own customization.
    > As for the development strategy, I'm in favor of the incremental approach
    > that posts one page at a time. The main benefit is that we are educating
    > the developers while iterating on it, and this will improve the adoption
    > rate in the long term.
    > Overall I'm very interested in this work, and would like to collaborate
    > with David to redesign and improve the UI.
    > ________________________________
    > From: Joshua Cohen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
    > Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2017 11:39
    > Subject: Re: Redesign of the Aurora UI
    > I think this looks great overall! I'm super excited to see the UI get some
    > love (and to set us up for better iteration on the UI going forward). My
    > biggest concern, of course, is the current hubbub vis-a-vis Apache and the
    > BSD-3+Patents license[1]. Have you tried running this against Preact to
    > confirm compatibility/performance? Also note that other Facebook libraries
    > have the same license problem (e.g. Immutable, Jest), so unless FB changes
    > their patent grant clause, I imagine we'd have to find alternatives to
    > those as well. If only we had landed this a week ago, we could've been
    > grandfathered in on the license front :(.
    > As far as the options for landing this, I'll leave that up to more active
    > reviewers, but my gut says that smaller reviews will make this easier to
    > parse, especially for those unfamiliar with React. That said, perhaps we
    > could go with an alternate method for reviewing here, where people review
    > against your fork directly and only when they're comfortable do you post
    > the whole patch to reviewboard for what should, by that point, be a rubber
    > stamp review?
    > In general, fantastic work, David!
    > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-319
    > On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 12:55 AM, David McLaughlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
    > >
    > wrote:
    > > Hey all,
    > >
    > > At Twitter we have had a long-standing desire to be able to put custom
    > > widgets and other UX enhancements into the Aurora UI. Recent prototype
    > work
    > > to do this in a clean way has proved fruitful and I'd like to present
    > this
    > > approach to the community and get feedback on the overall approach.
    > >
    > > The basic approach is simple:
    > >
    > > 1) Use the node plugin for gradle to bootstrap a modern web development
    > > build system using webpack and npm.
    > > 2) Use a modern JS view library like ReactJS (or Preact depending on the
    > > Facebook+Patents license issues for Apache proje
NEW: Monitor These Apps!
elasticsearch, apache solr, apache hbase, hadoop, redis, casssandra, amazon cloudwatch, mysql, memcached, apache kafka, apache zookeeper, apache storm, ubuntu, centOS, red hat, debian, puppet labs, java, senseiDB