[aerogear-dev] WebSocket and AeroGear ?

[Matthias Wessendorf]

On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 9:04 PM, Jay Balunas <jbalunas at redhat.com> wrote:
> This is similar to what I was thinking as well.
>
> There are two main types of push; native & non-native, but I don't like those designations.  It is really more like "live" & "background" push, referring to the state of the client.
>
> Live push == Application is open, and active on the client.  Push msgs are routed to the application via more traditional long/short polling, websockets, etc...
>
> Background push == Application is closed, and not active on the client.  Regular live push messages are not possible.  The only way to communicate is via APN, GC native messaging (sorry web apps - no love).
>
> In an ideal world there would be no difference to the application developer using AeroGear API's (client or server).  The server-side would know what clients are available, and the clients would be listening automatically.  Sending a message would be agnostic for the server-side.
>
> Unfortunately this can not "fully" be the case as background/native messages have limitations on the content, client support, and delivery mechanisms.

one option is, to "push / poll". The client gets a msg on what to
fetch. When back online it performs a "normal" fetch/poll for the data
in question

>  So I think the best we can do is setup a "smart" message system that gets you pretty close with good fallback api's and checks for what sort of messages are possible, or configured.
>
> Make sense, or is this just a big ramble? :-)
>
> -Jay
>
> On Dec 5, 2012, at 2:14 AM, Matthias Wessendorf wrote:
>
>> well,
>>
>> the idea is to have a wrapper/hook for "push notification" (e.g. APN)
>> in the notifier as well:
>> * receiving 'native push' events, when the app is offline (inactive,
>> not watching the tab/window)
>>
>> If an app is offline, you simple can't receive a websocket frame/msg.
>> So push is needed to tell AG that is needs to fetch data for sync etc.
>>
>> -Matthias
>>
>> On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 4:51 PM, Burr Sutter <bsutter at redhat.com> wrote:
>>> I am concerned about the words "push" and "notifier" as those can become confused with real "push notifications" which we will have to have a client API for in the future.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Dec 3, 2012, at 2:46 AM, Matthias Wessendorf wrote:
>>>
>>>> any further comments?
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 9:51 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew at apache.org> wrote:
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> yesterday some folks of the team meet, to talk about WebSocket - more
>>>>> generally (HTML5) connectivity.
>>>>>
>>>>> Here is a write-up from the meeting:
>>>>> https://gist.github.com/dd6e3c2da08830776996
>>>>>
>>>>> Feedback and comments are welcome - Please use the comment function on
>>>>> that gist!
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers!
>>>>> Matthias
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> 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 at lists.jboss.org
>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> aerogear-dev mailing list
>>> aerogear-dev at 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