[aerogear-dev] iOS Variant: Support for Production/Distribution SSL Certificates

Thu Jul 11 09:21:21 EDT 2013

On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 2:28 PM, Kris Borchers <kris at redhat.com> wrote:

>
> On Jul 11, 2013, at 7:15 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew at apache.org>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 1:12 PM, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew at apache.org>wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jul 9, 2013 at 1:50 PM, Kris Borchers <kris at redhat.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> On Jul 9, 2013, at 6:47 AM, Lucas Holmquist <lholmqui at redhat.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Sounds good.
>>>
>>> but i wonder if there would be a case where both could be active at the
>>> same time.
>>>
>>> for example,  some company has an app that is in production,  now they
>>> need to make some modifications to it and want to make sure that they
>>> didn't break their push notifications, so they want to send some push
>>> notifications to the development version since they have separate
>>> development devices.
>>>
>>> probably an edge case
>>>
>>>
>>> Hmmm. I'm not sure how edge that is. Seems like the appropriate
>>> development model to be able to test a change while keeping the production
>>> version running. I think this is a good case for being able to have both
>>> active and would require the ability to distinguish between the two in the
>>> Sender API.
>>>
>>
>>
>> Kris/Luke
>>
>> as mentioned in [1] the device token on the Production Profile /
>> environment is different. If one variant has both options (test/prod), I
>> think that there may be some tokens left over (Apple's feedback service
>> would not catch that - since it only looks for "invalid" tokens, on the
>> actual profile (invalid means: User disabled push, on the device - or
>> deleted app).
>>
>> Having a "test" variant allows the user to have the test tokens on a
>> different variant, and not being mixed. What's your thoughts on that?
>>
>
> One more thing, it is kinda odd that (by switching Profiles) the iOS app
> becomes a different token.
>
>
It's not the end of the world to (re)run the app with a different profile
(signing ID), I guess it's a matter of getting used to...

But... not really sure... a different variant, where you basically have two
apps (one for testing and one for production) would mean, I think, less
hassle for the "iOS app developer".

-Matthias

>   I guess just allowing one cert/passphrase per Variant does make more
> sense...
>
> A boolean flag would indicate if the app is production or not …
>
>
> +1
>
>
> -Matthias
>
>
>
>>
>>
>> -Matthias
>>
>>
>> [1] http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/aerogear-dev/2013-July/003879.html
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Jul 9, 2013, at 7:25 AM, Kris Borchers <kris at redhat.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> That all seems sane to me. +1
>>>
>>> On Jul 9, 2013, at 3:57 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew at apache.org>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hello!
>>>
>>> right now the iOS variant does _only_ support upload of an "Development
>>> SSL Certificate" (see [1]). I'd like to add support for an "Production SSL
>>> Certificate" to the iOS Variant model class.
>>>
>>> Besides the second certificate, the model class _should_ have a field to
>>> reflect the status (is production or not -> isProduction()), so that only
>>> one certificate is ACTIVE. Internally the "Sender API" would connect
>>> against the differen Apple servers (prod. verus dev), based on the value of
>>> the isProduction() method.
>>>
>>> Exposing "production" (or "development") on the Sender API would be
>>> really ugly. With the above said, the Sender-API remains stable.
>>>
>>> The value of "isProduction" would be updateable on the AdminUI (and the
>>> underlying RESTful endpoints).
>>>
>>> -Matthias
>>>
>>> [1]
>>> https://github.com/aerogear/aerogear-unified-push-server/blob/master/src/main/java/org/jboss/aerogear/connectivity/model/iOSVariant.java#L38-L41
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> 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
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
> _______________________________________________
> 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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/aerogear-dev/attachments/20130711/2ad1db91/attachment.html 