Any particular reason for it not to be incorporated into the iOS library and be a separate project?

On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 6:52 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew(a)apache.org&gt;wrote: > Hi, > > now that the most items for the iOS Push registration SDK ([1]) have been > fixed, I'd like to get an "early" release out. > > E.g. a 0.5.0 version of it.. (release often, release early) > > Thoughts? > > -Matthias > > > [1] https://github.com/aerogear/aerogear-push-ios-registration > > -- > Matthias Wessendorf > > blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ > sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf > twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf > > _______________________________________________ > aerogear-dev mailing list > aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev > _______________________________________________ aerogear-dev mailing list aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev

On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 5:34 PM, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew(a)apache.org&gt; wrote: On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 5:29 PM, Daniel Passos <daniel(a)passos.me&gt; wrote: Any particular reason for it not to be incorporated into the iOS library and be a separate project? Not really. I think it's not that bad if the lib is "isolated". For instance, if an iOS project just wants to use the UnifiedPush server, it's less of a "large" dependency for them to add. However if folks want to make it part of the AeroGear-iOS project, that's fine too. Any thoughts ? I think both have pros/cons :-) However, the JS and Android projects also include all the things in one lib, so I guess it's a good thing to follow that as well [ ] Include the Push bits in the AeroGear-iOS lib [ ] Keep the Push SDK separated -Matthias -Matthias On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 6:52 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew(a)apache.org&gt; wrote: Hi, now that the most items for the iOS Push registration SDK ([1]) have been fixed, I'd like to get an "early" release out. E.g. a 0.5.0 version of it.. (release often, release early) Thoughts? -Matthias [1] https://github.com/aerogear/aerogear-push-ios-registration -- Matthias Wessendorf blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf _______________________________________________ aerogear-dev mailing list aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev _______________________________________________ aerogear-dev mailing list aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev -- Matthias Wessendorf blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf -- Matthias Wessendorf blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf _______________________________________________ aerogear-dev mailing list aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev

On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 10:08 AM, Corinne Krych <corinnekrych(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: I think consistency is key. I would stick to Android/JS When we feel the need to split we then then all. +1

Corinne On Jul 19, 2013, at 10:03 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew(a)apache.org&gt; wrote: > > > > On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 5:34 PM, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew(a)apache.org&gt; wrote: > > > > On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 5:29 PM, Daniel Passos <daniel(a)passos.me&gt; wrote: > Any particular reason for it not to be incorporated into the iOS library and be a separate project? > > Not really. > > I think it's not that bad if the lib is "isolated". For instance, if an iOS project just wants to use the UnifiedPush server, it's less of a "large" dependency for them to add. > > However if folks want to make it part of the AeroGear-iOS project, that's fine too. > > > Any thoughts ? > > I think both have pros/cons :-) However, the JS and Android projects also include all the things in one lib, so I guess it's a good thing to follow that as well > > > [ ] Include the Push bits in the AeroGear-iOS lib > [ ] Keep the Push SDK separated > > > -Matthias > > > > > -Matthias > > > > > > On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 6:52 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew(a)apache.org&gt; wrote: > Hi, > > now that the most items for the iOS Push registration SDK ([1]) have been fixed, I'd like to get an "early" release out. > > E.g. a 0.5.0 version of it.. (release often, release early) > > Thoughts? > > -Matthias > > > [1] https://github.com/aerogear/aerogear-push-ios-registration > > -- > Matthias Wessendorf > > blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ > sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf > twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf > > _______________________________________________ > aerogear-dev mailing list > aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev > > > _______________________________________________ > aerogear-dev mailing list > aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev > > > > -- > Matthias Wessendorf > > blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ > sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf > twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf > > > > -- > Matthias Wessendorf > > blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ > sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf > twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf > _______________________________________________ > aerogear-dev mailing list > aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev _______________________________________________ aerogear-dev mailing list aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev -- Matthias Wessendorf blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf _______________________________________________ aerogear-dev mailing list aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev

On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 11:42 AM, Christos Vasilakis <cvasilak(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: On Jul 19, 2013, at 11:06 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew(a)apache.org&gt; wrote: > > > > On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 10:08 AM, Corinne Krych <corinnekrych(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: > I think consistency is key. > I would stick to Android/JS > When we feel the need to split we then then all. > > +1 > Personally, I am more into having the registration, as a separate library so it can be easily integrated into any iOS project, yes there are pros/cons for both approaches. Initially I did it separated, because of the concern "Oh, for device registration, I really have to use all of that lib". but we can stick on following the same approach as the other platforms and, as Corinne suggested, if the need arises we can split into the separate lib. for consistency it makes sense, yes (and than, I think, we should integrate the OTP bits, perhaps as well ?)

+1 Thanks, Christos > > Corinne > > On Jul 19, 2013, at 10:03 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew(a)apache.org&gt; wrote: > >> >> >> >> On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 5:34 PM, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew(a)apache.org&gt; wrote: >> >> >> >> On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 5:29 PM, Daniel Passos <daniel(a)passos.me&gt; wrote: >> Any particular reason for it not to be incorporated into the iOS library and be a separate project? >> >> Not really. >> >> I think it's not that bad if the lib is "isolated". For instance, if an iOS project just wants to use the UnifiedPush server, it's less of a "large" dependency for them to add. >> >> However if folks want to make it part of the AeroGear-iOS project, that's fine too. >> >> >> Any thoughts ? >> >> I think both have pros/cons :-) However, the JS and Android projects also include all the things in one lib, so I guess it's a good thing to follow that as well >> >> >> [ ] Include the Push bits in the AeroGear-iOS lib >> [ ] Keep the Push SDK separated >> >> >> -Matthias >> >> >> >> >> -Matthias >> >> >> >> >> >> On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 6:52 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew(a)apache.org&gt; wrote: >> Hi, >> >> now that the most items for the iOS Push registration SDK ([1]) have been fixed, I'd like to get an "early" release out. >> >> E.g. a 0.5.0 version of it.. (release often, release early) >> >> Thoughts? >> >> -Matthias >> >> >> [1] https://github.com/aerogear/aerogear-push-ios-registration >> >> -- >> Matthias Wessendorf >> >> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ >> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf >> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf >> >> _______________________________________________ >> aerogear-dev mailing list >> aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> aerogear-dev mailing list >> aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev >> >> >> >> -- >> Matthias Wessendorf >> >> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ >> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf >> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf >> >> >> >> -- >> Matthias Wessendorf >> >> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ >> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf >> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf >> _______________________________________________ >> aerogear-dev mailing list >> aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev > > > _______________________________________________ > aerogear-dev mailing list > aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev > > > > -- > Matthias Wessendorf > > blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ > sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf > twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf > _______________________________________________ > aerogear-dev mailing list > aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev _______________________________________________ aerogear-dev mailing list aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev -- Matthias Wessendorf blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf _______________________________________________ aerogear-dev mailing list aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev

On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 10:03:06AM +0200, Matthias Wessendorf wrote: > [ ] Include the Push bits in the AeroGear-iOS lib > [ ] Keep the Push SDK separated +1 - the more modular the merrier :)

I also agree on keeping it, as it is On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 2:58 PM, Bruno Oliveira <bruno(a)abstractj.org&gt;wrote: > +1 brodular > > Douglas Campos wrote: > > On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 10:03:06AM +0200, Matthias Wessendorf wrote: > >> [ ] Include the Push bits in the AeroGear-iOS lib > >> [ ] Keep the Push SDK separated > > +1 - the more modular the merrier :) > > > > -- > abstractj > > _______________________________________________ > aerogear-dev mailing list > aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev > -- Matthias Wessendorf blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf

Are we going to do the same for Android//JS then?

++ Corinne On Jul 23, 2013, at 7:35 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew(a)apache.org&gt; wrote: Alright, as mentioned yesterday in the team meeting: the push sdk will be modular, like the OTP-iOS So, nothing here changes. btw. Later this week we will see a version going to CocoaPods On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 12:20 PM, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew(a)apache.org&gt;wrote: > > I also agree on keeping it, as it is > > > On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 2:58 PM, Bruno Oliveira <bruno(a)abstractj.org&gt;wrote: > >> +1 brodular >> >> Douglas Campos wrote: >> > On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 10:03:06AM +0200, Matthias Wessendorf wrote: >> >> [ ] Include the Push bits in the AeroGear-iOS lib >> >> [ ] Keep the Push SDK separated >> > +1 - the more modular the merrier :) >> > >> >> -- >> abstractj >> >> _______________________________________________ >> aerogear-dev mailing list >> aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev >> > > > > -- > Matthias Wessendorf > > blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ > sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf > twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf > -- Matthias Wessendorf blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf _______________________________________________ aerogear-dev mailing list aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev _______________________________________________ aerogear-dev mailing list aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev

We don't isolate it in a separate project, push is part of the library android. wdyt about it?

Matthias Wessendorf wrote: > > > > On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 5:01 PM, Corinne Krych <corinnekrych(a)gmail.com > <mailto:corinnekrych@gmail.com>> wrote: > > Are we going to do the same for Android//JS then? > > > The JS builds are able to ship "isolated". > > On Android, we can stick to the current model, IMO > > -M > > > ++ > Corinne > > On Jul 23, 2013, at 7:35 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew(a)apache.org > <mailto:matzew@apache.org>> wrote: > >> Alright, as mentioned yesterday in the team meeting: >> >> the push sdk will be modular, like the OTP-iOS >> >> So, nothing here changes. >> >> btw. Later this week we will see a version going to CocoaPods >> >> >> >> On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 12:20 PM, Matthias Wessendorf >> <matzew(a)apache.org <mailto:matzew@apache.org>> wrote: >> >> >> I also agree on keeping it, as it is >> >> >> On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 2:58 PM, Bruno Oliveira >> <bruno(a)abstractj.org <mailto:bruno@abstractj.org>> wrote: >> >> +1 brodular >> >> Douglas Campos wrote: >> > On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 10:03:06AM +0200, Matthias >> Wessendorf wrote: >> >> [ ] Include the Push bits in the AeroGear-iOS lib >> >> [ ] Keep the Push SDK separated >> > +1 - the more modular the merrier :) >> > >> >> -- >> abstractj _______________________________________________ aerogear-dev mailing list aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev