[aerogear-dev] Android keys (Re: AeroGear Push Message Format)

[Matthias Wessendorf]

On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 4:42 PM, Daniel Passos <daniel at passos.me> wrote:

> We don't have special words on Android, but we can use the same of iOS and
> shoot the same behaviors. wdyt?
>

Like you did on the PR, for "alert", right ?

I personally do like that very much



>
> On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 9:15 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew at apache.org>wrote:
>
>> Summers, Passos,
>>
>>
>> wondering if we should/could honor "android" specific keys as well
>> (similar to the iOS keys that we "honor")
>>
>> See:
>>
>> https://github.com/aerogear/aerogear.org/blob/master/docs/specs/aerogear-push-messages/index.markdown#ios-special-keys
>>
>>
>> -Matthias
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 5:36 PM, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew at apache.org>wrote:
>>
>>> reminder, that ID is just the primary key :-)
>>>
>>> meaningful are "pushApplicationID" and "variantID"
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 3:17 PM, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew at apache.org>wrote:
>>>
>>>> Luke
>>>>
>>>> once this landed, it will be "pushApplicationID" and "variantID" - the
>>>> ID is than meaningless (at least for PushEE server).
>>>>
>>>> -M
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 6:45 PM, Lucas Holmquist <lholmqui at redhat.com>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> plus plus
>>>>>
>>>>> On May 31, 2013, at 12:39 PM, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew at apache.org>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> https://issues.jboss.org/browse/AGPUSH-86
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 6:25 PM, Luke Holmquist <lholmqui at redhat.com>wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On May 31, 2013, at 12:24 PM, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew at apache.org>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> somehow the device needs to say: "I belong to android variant"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> besides the @Id /PK, we can have a second field / column that
>>>>>> represents:
>>>>>> * PushAppID
>>>>>> * VariantID
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yup. Having these would solve that
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Was that your question?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Friday, May 31, 2013, Lucas Holmquist wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> something that i was thinking about after doing some examples is
>>>>>>> that i'm not sure how i feel about using the PK's of each table as the
>>>>>>> identifier to register/broadcast clients.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> We are sort of giving meaning to data that really shouldn't have
>>>>>>> meaning.  it should really only be used to identify the row.  It might be
>>>>>>> better to have another key on each table/object that is the identifier.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So in one of the examples i did,  the app on the device will
>>>>>>> register the device with the push server,  but i needed to also include the
>>>>>>> id of the variant instance
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> i guess i'm thinking if someone migrates their database,  these keys
>>>>>>> could get messed up.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> wdyt?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On May 28, 2013, at 2:53 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew at apache.org>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 8:51 AM, Corinne Krych <
>>>>>>> corinnekrych at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> in selective push is:
>>>>>>> ==> variant: iOS  + alias: mwessendorf
>>>>>>> a valid criteria too?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> yes. let me update the related doc(s)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 28 May 2013 08:51, Corinne Krych <corinnekrych at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 28 May 2013 08:48, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew at apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> TYPO:
>>>>>>> ==> variant: iOS (since a PushAPP _might_ have only one iOS variant)
>>>>>>> + deviceType:iPadMini  + alias: mwessendorf
>>>>>>> or
>>>>>>> ==> variant: iOS (since a PushAPP _might_ have only one iOS variant)
>>>>>>> + deviceType:iPhone  + alias: mwessendorf
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 8:43 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <
>>>>>>> matzew at apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 12:00 AM, Corinne Krych <
>>>>>>> corinnekrych at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> When doing selective push query, is there any overlap between mobile
>>>>>>> variant (which I understand like mobile type which contains certificates)
>>>>>>> and device type?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> MobileVariant (or call it type) is something like "Android", or
>>>>>>> "iOS".
>>>>>>> deviceTypes would be iPad, iPod, iPhone, iWatch :)  - or "Android
>>>>>>> Table", "Andrpid phone", android what not
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Sure.... ideally there are several variants:
>>>>>>> - iOS iPhone 5 optimised app in the app store
>>>>>>> - iOS iPhone 4s optimised app in the app store
>>>>>>> - iOS iPhone 3 optimised app in the app store
>>>>>>> - iOS iPad mini optimised app in the app store
>>>>>>> etc :)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> But, if there is only one variant, it's totally valid to install an
>>>>>>> iOS application (from the appstore), on an iPad and an iPhone;
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Both aimed at defining categories.
>>>>>>>  Are those categories defined and fixed in the spec or can they be
>>>>>>> extended?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I don't understand categories, here
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Can we do a selective push based on mobileType=mobile variant and
>>>>>>> alias=john at gmail?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20130618/0fb15491/attachment.html