6:03 a.m.
Good morning everyone! Lay out your costumes from halloween and let's talk about this
jira (https://issues.jboss.org/browse/AEROGEAR-593).
Passos did a great work creating a builder for Pipes and of course we can improve it more
and more, it's all about software. Currently to create a Pipe we must do it:
Pipeline pipeline = new Pipeline(ROOT_URL);
pipeline.pipe().name("tasks").useClass(Task.class).buildAndAdd();
pipeline.pipe().name("tags").useClass(Tag.class).buildAndAdd();
Chatting with Matthias we agreed that would be better 2 alternatives:
Pipeline pipeline = new Pipeline(ROOT_URL);
pipeline.add(Project.class).build();
Doing just this implicitly means that the name of the pipe will be "Project" and
if you need 'extras':
Pipeline pipeline = new Pipeline(ROOT_URL);
pipeline.add(Project.class).endpoint("foo").name("bar").auth(myAuthMod).build();
What do you guys think?
--
"The measure of a man is what he does with power" - Plato
-
@abstractj
-
Volenti Nihil Difficile
6:15 a.m.
+1 to pipeline.add(Project.class)
On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 9:03 AM, Bruno Oliveira <bruno(a)abstractj.org> wrote:
Good morning everyone! Lay out your costumes from halloween and
let's
talk about this jira (https://issues.jboss.org/browse/AEROGEAR-593).
Passos did a great work creating a builder for Pipes and of course we can
improve it more and more, it's all about software. Currently to create a
Pipe we must do it:
Pipeline pipeline = new Pipeline(ROOT_URL);
pipeline.pipe().name("tasks").useClass(Task.class).buildAndAdd();
pipeline.pipe().name("tags").useClass(Tag.class).buildAndAdd();
Chatting with Matthias we agreed that would be better 2 alternatives:
Pipeline pipeline = new Pipeline(ROOT_URL);
pipeline.add(Project.class).build();
Doing just this implicitly means that the name of the pipe will be
"Project" and if you need 'extras':
Pipeline pipeline = new Pipeline(ROOT_URL);
pipeline.add(Project.class).endpoint("foo").name("bar").auth(myAuthMod).build();
What do you guys think?
--
"The measure of a man is what he does with power" - Plato
-
@abstractj
-
Volenti Nihil Difficile
_______________________________________________
aerogear-dev mailing list
aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
6:49 a.m.
On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 12:15 PM, Daniel Passos <daniel(a)passos.me> wrote:
+1 to pipeline.add(Project.class)
One more thing.. 'pipeline.add(Type.class);' will reflect to the following URL:
http://BASE_URL/types <<<== note the 's' for plural ....
Fluent API:
the combination of 'add()' and a followed/ending 'build()' makes sense
in terms of a fluent API:
- here you add something (-> pipe) that is created (build) at the end
of the statement...
A little note aside...
Pipeline pipeline = new Pipeline(ROOT_URL);
pipeline.pipe(Project.class).endpoint("foo").name("bar").auth(myAuthMod).buildAndAdd();
Is fine for me too:
-pipe => indicates you create a pipe object;
-buildAndAdd => you build the object and add it to the pipeline.
Not sure if the 'buildAndAdd' is a bit too verbose.
I am fine with the suggestion from Bruno
(pipeline.add(class).build();), but wanted to share the notes on the
pipe().buildAndAdd() as well
-M
On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 9:03 AM, Bruno Oliveira <bruno(a)abstractj.org> wrote:
>
> Good morning everyone! Lay out your costumes from halloween and let's talk
> about this jira (https://issues.jboss.org/browse/AEROGEAR-593).
>
> Passos did a great work creating a builder for Pipes and of course we can
> improve it more and more, it's all about software. Currently to create a
> Pipe we must do it:
>
> Pipeline pipeline = new Pipeline(ROOT_URL);
> pipeline.pipe().name("tasks").useClass(Task.class).buildAndAdd();
> pipeline.pipe().name("tags").useClass(Tag.class).buildAndAdd();
>
> Chatting with Matthias we agreed that would be better 2 alternatives:
>
> Pipeline pipeline = new Pipeline(ROOT_URL);
> pipeline.add(Project.class).build();
>
> Doing just this implicitly means that the name of the pipe will be
> "Project" and if you need 'extras':
>
> Pipeline pipeline = new Pipeline(ROOT_URL);
>
>
pipeline.add(Project.class).endpoint("foo").name("bar").auth(myAuthMod).build();
>
> What do you guys think?
>
>
> --
> "The measure of a man is what he does with power" - Plato
> -
> @abstractj
> -
> Volenti Nihil Difficile
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
6:55 a.m.
On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 12:49 PM, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew(a)apache.org> wrote:
On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 12:15 PM, Daniel Passos
<daniel(a)passos.me> wrote:
> +1 to pipeline.add(Project.class)
One more thing.. 'pipeline.add(Type.class);' will reflect to the following URL:
http://BASE_URL/types <<<== note the 's' for plural ....
I just wanted to ask about that :)
Maybe we could even introduce an annotation on 'entity' classes that
would specify an endpoint, and take that into account.
Fluent API:
the combination of 'add()' and a followed/ending 'build()' makes sense
in terms of a fluent API:
- here you add something (-> pipe) that is created (build) at the end
of the statement...
Yes that's nice.
A little note aside...
Pipeline pipeline = new Pipeline(ROOT_URL);
pipeline.pipe(Project.class).endpoint("foo").name("bar").auth(myAuthMod).buildAndAdd();
Is fine for me too:
-pipe => indicates you create a pipe object;
-buildAndAdd => you build the object and add it to the pipeline.
Not sure if the 'buildAndAdd' is a bit too verbose.
I am fine with the suggestion from Bruno
(pipeline.add(class).build();), but wanted to share the notes on the
pipe().buildAndAdd() as well
-M
>
> On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 9:03 AM, Bruno Oliveira <bruno(a)abstractj.org> wrote:
>>
>> Good morning everyone! Lay out your costumes from halloween and let's talk
>> about this jira (https://issues.jboss.org/browse/AEROGEAR-593).
>>
>> Passos did a great work creating a builder for Pipes and of course we can
>> improve it more and more, it's all about software. Currently to create a
>> Pipe we must do it:
>>
>> Pipeline pipeline = new Pipeline(ROOT_URL);
>> pipeline.pipe().name("tasks").useClass(Task.class).buildAndAdd();
>> pipeline.pipe().name("tags").useClass(Tag.class).buildAndAdd();
>>
>> Chatting with Matthias we agreed that would be better 2 alternatives:
>>
>> Pipeline pipeline = new Pipeline(ROOT_URL);
>> pipeline.add(Project.class).build();
>>
>> Doing just this implicitly means that the name of the pipe will be
>> "Project" and if you need 'extras':
>>
>> Pipeline pipeline = new Pipeline(ROOT_URL);
>>
>>
pipeline.add(Project.class).endpoint("foo").name("bar").auth(myAuthMod).build();
>>
>> What do you guys think?
>>
>>
>> --
>> "The measure of a man is what he does with power" - Plato
>> -
>> @abstractj
>> -
>> Volenti Nihil Difficile
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
7:48 a.m.
-1 to Pipeline.add
+1 to Pipline.pipe w/ buildAndAdd() (or overloading build to also add)
I don't like pipeline.add(Class) because it implies that the adding is happening then
and you don't have to do more work. I like buildAndAdd or overloading the builder
Pipeline provides because it is either more explicit or more automatic respectivly.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Matthias Wessendorf" <matzew(a)apache.org>
To: "AeroGear Developer Mailing List" <aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>
Sent: Thursday, November 1, 2012 7:49:11 AM
Subject: Re: [aerogear-dev] AEROGEAR-593 - Builder pattern isn't consistent
On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 12:15 PM, Daniel Passos <daniel(a)passos.me> wrote:
+1 to pipeline.add(Project.class)
One more thing.. 'pipeline.add(Type.class);' will reflect to the following URL:
http://BASE_URL/types <<<== note the 's' for plural ....
Fluent API:
the combination of 'add()' and a followed/ending 'build()' makes sense
in terms of a fluent API:
- here you add something (-> pipe) that is created (build) at the end
of the statement...
A little note aside...
Pipeline pipeline = new Pipeline(ROOT_URL);
pipeline.pipe(Project.class).endpoint("foo").name("bar").auth(myAuthMod).buildAndAdd();
Is fine for me too:
-pipe => indicates you create a pipe object;
-buildAndAdd => you build the object and add it to the pipeline.
Not sure if the 'buildAndAdd' is a bit too verbose.
I am fine with the suggestion from Bruno
(pipeline.add(class).build();), but wanted to share the notes on the
pipe().buildAndAdd() as well
-M
On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 9:03 AM, Bruno Oliveira <bruno(a)abstractj.org> wrote:
>
> Good morning everyone! Lay out your costumes from halloween and let's talk
> about this jira (https://issues.jboss.org/browse/AEROGEAR-593).
>
> Passos did a great work creating a builder for Pipes and of course we can
> improve it more and more, it's all about software. Currently to create a
> Pipe we must do it:
>
> Pipeline pipeline = new Pipeline(ROOT_URL);
> pipeline.pipe().name("tasks").useClass(Task.class).buildAndAdd();
> pipeline.pipe().name("tags").useClass(Tag.class).buildAndAdd();
>
> Chatting with Matthias we agreed that would be better 2 alternatives:
>
> Pipeline pipeline = new Pipeline(ROOT_URL);
> pipeline.add(Project.class).build();
>
> Doing just this implicitly means that the name of the pipe will be
> "Project" and if you need 'extras':
>
> Pipeline pipeline = new Pipeline(ROOT_URL);
>
>
pipeline.add(Project.class).endpoint("foo").name("bar").auth(myAuthMod).build();
>
> What do you guys think?
>
>
> --
> "The measure of a man is what he does with power" - Plato
> -
> @abstractj
> -
> Volenti Nihil Difficile
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
8:40 a.m.
-1 to overloading build() to also add.
That would give no indication that a reference is kept by Pipeline in
the background, and it's not something you normally expect from a
factory object, to keep references to created objects around.
On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 1:48 PM, Summers Pittman <supittma(a)redhat.com> wrote:
-1 to Pipeline.add
+1 to Pipline.pipe w/ buildAndAdd() (or overloading build to also add)
I don't like pipeline.add(Class) because it implies that the adding is happening then
and you don't have to do more work. I like buildAndAdd or overloading the builder
Pipeline provides because it is either more explicit or more automatic respectivly.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Matthias Wessendorf" <matzew(a)apache.org>
To: "AeroGear Developer Mailing List" <aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>
Sent: Thursday, November 1, 2012 7:49:11 AM
Subject: Re: [aerogear-dev] AEROGEAR-593 - Builder pattern isn't consistent
On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 12:15 PM, Daniel Passos <daniel(a)passos.me> wrote:
> +1 to pipeline.add(Project.class)
One more thing.. 'pipeline.add(Type.class);' will reflect to the following URL:
http://BASE_URL/types <<<== note the 's' for plural ....
Fluent API:
the combination of 'add()' and a followed/ending 'build()' makes sense
in terms of a fluent API:
- here you add something (-> pipe) that is created (build) at the end
of the statement...
A little note aside...
Pipeline pipeline = new Pipeline(ROOT_URL);
pipeline.pipe(Project.class).endpoint("foo").name("bar").auth(myAuthMod).buildAndAdd();
Is fine for me too:
-pipe => indicates you create a pipe object;
-buildAndAdd => you build the object and add it to the pipeline.
Not sure if the 'buildAndAdd' is a bit too verbose.
I am fine with the suggestion from Bruno
(pipeline.add(class).build();), but wanted to share the notes on the
pipe().buildAndAdd() as well
-M
>
> On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 9:03 AM, Bruno Oliveira <bruno(a)abstractj.org> wrote:
>>
>> Good morning everyone! Lay out your costumes from halloween and let's talk
>> about this jira (https://issues.jboss.org/browse/AEROGEAR-593).
>>
>> Passos did a great work creating a builder for Pipes and of course we can
>> improve it more and more, it's all about software. Currently to create a
>> Pipe we must do it:
>>
>> Pipeline pipeline = new Pipeline(ROOT_URL);
>> pipeline.pipe().name("tasks").useClass(Task.class).buildAndAdd();
>> pipeline.pipe().name("tags").useClass(Tag.class).buildAndAdd();
>>
>> Chatting with Matthias we agreed that would be better 2 alternatives:
>>
>> Pipeline pipeline = new Pipeline(ROOT_URL);
>> pipeline.add(Project.class).build();
>>
>> Doing just this implicitly means that the name of the pipe will be
>> "Project" and if you need 'extras':
>>
>> Pipeline pipeline = new Pipeline(ROOT_URL);
>>
>>
pipeline.add(Project.class).endpoint("foo").name("bar").auth(myAuthMod).build();
>>
>> What do you guys think?
>>
>>
>> --
>> "The measure of a man is what he does with power" - Plato
>> -
>> @abstractj
>> -
>> Volenti Nihil Difficile
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
8:43 a.m.
On 11/01/2012 09:40 AM, Marko Strukelj wrote:
-1 to overloading build() to also add.
Yeah. In my
implementation the factory method returns an AddAuthBuilder
which has a .add() method which builds and adds (and says so in the javadoc)
That would give no indication that a reference is kept by Pipeline
in
the background, and it's not something you normally expect from a
factory object, to keep references to created objects around.
On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 1:48 PM, Summers Pittman<supittma(a)redhat.com> wrote:
> -1 to Pipeline.add
> +1 to Pipline.pipe w/ buildAndAdd() (or overloading build to also add)
>
> I don't like pipeline.add(Class) because it implies that the adding is happening
then and you don't have to do more work. I like buildAndAdd or overloading the
builder Pipeline provides because it is either more explicit or more automatic
respectivly.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Matthias Wessendorf"<matzew(a)apache.org>
> To: "AeroGear Developer Mailing List"<aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>
> Sent: Thursday, November 1, 2012 7:49:11 AM
> Subject: Re: [aerogear-dev] AEROGEAR-593 - Builder pattern isn't consistent
>
> On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 12:15 PM, Daniel Passos<daniel(a)passos.me> wrote:
>> +1 to pipeline.add(Project.class)
> One more thing.. 'pipeline.add(Type.class);' will reflect to the following
URL:
> http://BASE_URL/types<<<== note the 's' for plural ....
>
> Fluent API:
> the combination of 'add()' and a followed/ending 'build()' makes
sense
> in terms of a fluent API:
> - here you add something (-> pipe) that is created (build) at the end
> of the statement...
>
> A little note aside...
>
> Pipeline pipeline = new Pipeline(ROOT_URL);
>
pipeline.pipe(Project.class).endpoint("foo").name("bar").auth(myAuthMod).buildAndAdd();
>
> Is fine for me too:
> -pipe => indicates you create a pipe object;
> -buildAndAdd => you build the object and add it to the pipeline.
>
> Not sure if the 'buildAndAdd' is a bit too verbose.
>
> I am fine with the suggestion from Bruno
> (pipeline.add(class).build();), but wanted to share the notes on the
> pipe().buildAndAdd() as well
>
>
> -M
>
>
>> On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 9:03 AM, Bruno Oliveira<bruno(a)abstractj.org>
wrote:
>>> Good morning everyone! Lay out your costumes from halloween and let's
talk
>>> about this jira (https://issues.jboss.org/browse/AEROGEAR-593).
>>>
>>> Passos did a great work creating a builder for Pipes and of course we can
>>> improve it more and more, it's all about software. Currently to create a
>>> Pipe we must do it:
>>>
>>> Pipeline pipeline = new Pipeline(ROOT_URL);
>>> pipeline.pipe().name("tasks").useClass(Task.class).buildAndAdd();
>>> pipeline.pipe().name("tags").useClass(Tag.class).buildAndAdd();
>>>
>>> Chatting with Matthias we agreed that would be better 2 alternatives:
>>>
>>> Pipeline pipeline = new Pipeline(ROOT_URL);
>>> pipeline.add(Project.class).build();
>>>
>>> Doing just this implicitly means that the name of the pipe will be
>>> "Project" and if you need 'extras':
>>>
>>> Pipeline pipeline = new Pipeline(ROOT_URL);
>>>
>>>
pipeline.add(Project.class).endpoint("foo").name("bar").auth(myAuthMod).build();
>>>
>>> What do you guys think?
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> "The measure of a man is what he does with power" - Plato
>>> -
>>> @abstractj
>>> -
>>> Volenti Nihil Difficile
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
_______________________________________________
aerogear-dev mailing list
aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
8:50 a.m.
Sorry Guys,
I did not pay attention to that. Actually when I said +1 I wanted to say +1
to pipeline.pipe(Class) and not to pipeline.add(Class)
using pipeline.pipe(Project.class).buildAndAdd() you don't need to specify
mandatory "name" and "class" to call buildAndAdd()
The way I see, it's less effort to do, so wdyt?
https://gist.github.com/3973193
On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 10:48 AM, Summers Pittman <supittma(a)redhat.com>wrote:
-1 to Pipeline.add
+1 to Pipline.pipe w/ buildAndAdd() (or overloading build to also add)
I don't like pipeline.add(Class) because it implies that the adding is
happening then and you don't have to do more work. I like buildAndAdd or
overloading the builder Pipeline provides because it is either more
explicit or more automatic respectivly.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Matthias Wessendorf" <matzew(a)apache.org>
To: "AeroGear Developer Mailing List" <aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>
Sent: Thursday, November 1, 2012 7:49:11 AM
Subject: Re: [aerogear-dev] AEROGEAR-593 - Builder pattern isn't consistent
On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 12:15 PM, Daniel Passos <daniel(a)passos.me> wrote:
> +1 to pipeline.add(Project.class)
One more thing.. 'pipeline.add(Type.class);' will reflect to the following
URL:
http://BASE_URL/types <<<== note the 's' for plural ....
Fluent API:
the combination of 'add()' and a followed/ending 'build()' makes sense
in terms of a fluent API:
- here you add something (-> pipe) that is created (build) at the end
of the statement...
A little note aside...
Pipeline pipeline = new Pipeline(ROOT_URL);
pipeline.pipe(Project.class).endpoint("foo").name("bar").auth(myAuthMod).buildAndAdd();
Is fine for me too:
-pipe => indicates you create a pipe object;
-buildAndAdd => you build the object and add it to the pipeline.
Not sure if the 'buildAndAdd' is a bit too verbose.
I am fine with the suggestion from Bruno
(pipeline.add(class).build();), but wanted to share the notes on the
pipe().buildAndAdd() as well
-M
>
> On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 9:03 AM, Bruno Oliveira <bruno(a)abstractj.org>
wrote:
>>
>> Good morning everyone! Lay out your costumes from halloween and let's
talk
>> about this jira (https://issues.jboss.org/browse/AEROGEAR-593).
>>
>> Passos did a great work creating a builder for Pipes and of course we
can
>> improve it more and more, it's all about software. Currently to create a
>> Pipe we must do it:
>>
>> Pipeline pipeline = new Pipeline(ROOT_URL);
>> pipeline.pipe().name("tasks").useClass(Task.class).buildAndAdd();
>> pipeline.pipe().name("tags").useClass(Tag.class).buildAndAdd();
>>
>> Chatting with Matthias we agreed that would be better 2 alternatives:
>>
>> Pipeline pipeline = new Pipeline(ROOT_URL);
>> pipeline.add(Project.class).build();
>>
>> Doing just this implicitly means that the name of the pipe will be
>> "Project" and if you need 'extras':
>>
>> Pipeline pipeline = new Pipeline(ROOT_URL);
>>
>>
pipeline.add(Project.class).endpoint("foo").name("bar").auth(myAuthMod).build();
>>
>> What do you guys think?
>>
>>
>> --
>> "The measure of a man is what he does with power" - Plato
>> -
>> @abstractj
>> -
>> Volenti Nihil Difficile
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
4231
days inactive
4231
days old
7 comments
6 participants
participants (6)
-
Bruno Oliveira -
Daniel Passos -
Marko Strukelj -
Matthias Wessendorf -
Summers Pittman -
supittma＠redhat.com