From matzew at apache.org Tue Dec 1 02:38:16 2015 From: matzew at apache.org (Matthias Wessendorf) Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2015 08:38:16 +0100 Subject: [aerogear-dev] Worth to update Node.js build for UPS Admin? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I created a JIRA, in case someone with Node skills is interested: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/AGPUSH-1541 On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 2:54 AM, Luke Holmquist wrote: > also reply !== volunteering :) :) > > > On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 8:53 PM, Luke Holmquist > wrote: > >> probably would be a good idea to try and update to the latest version. >> JIRA? :) >> >> without looking at the dependencies, i'd imagine that some of them need >> updating since there were breaking changes going from 0.10 to 0.12 >> >> any stack trace for the error. >> >> On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 5:41 PM, Matthias Wessendorf >> wrote: >> >>> Hi folks, >>> >>> I was wondering if it makes sense to update the Node based build for the >>> Admin UI of the UPS to use a slightly newer version of Node.js >>> >>> Currently we are using v0.10.31: >>> >>> https://github.com/aerogear/aerogear-unifiedpush-server/blob/master/admin-ui/pom.xml#L60 >>> >>> I changed that line to v5.1.0 and, to be honest, as expected, it did not >>> work :-) But, surprisingly an update to something lower (e.g. 0.12.8) did >>> also not work :-( >>> >>> That actually made we wonder if this might become a problem, sooner or >>> later, and if we should be updating the build to use a more modern Node/NPM >>> version for our build? >>> >>> Any thoughts (or volunteers :-)) >>> -Matthias >>> >>> -- >>> 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/20151201/93083bca/attachment.html From lfryc at redhat.com Tue Dec 1 02:59:29 2015 From: lfryc at redhat.com (Lukas Fryc) Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2015 08:59:29 +0100 Subject: [aerogear-dev] Worth to update Node.js build for UPS Admin? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: It is definitely nice to have it upgraded (nothing urgent though), I would put some Component Upgrade issue down, and identify scope first. On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 2:54 AM, Luke Holmquist wrote: > also reply !== volunteering :) :) > > > On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 8:53 PM, Luke Holmquist > wrote: > >> probably would be a good idea to try and update to the latest version. >> JIRA? :) >> >> without looking at the dependencies, i'd imagine that some of them need >> updating since there were breaking changes going from 0.10 to 0.12 >> >> any stack trace for the error. >> >> On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 5:41 PM, Matthias Wessendorf >> wrote: >> >>> Hi folks, >>> >>> I was wondering if it makes sense to update the Node based build for the >>> Admin UI of the UPS to use a slightly newer version of Node.js >>> >>> Currently we are using v0.10.31: >>> >>> https://github.com/aerogear/aerogear-unifiedpush-server/blob/master/admin-ui/pom.xml#L60 >>> >>> I changed that line to v5.1.0 and, to be honest, as expected, it did not >>> work :-) But, surprisingly an update to something lower (e.g. 0.12.8) did >>> also not work :-( >>> >>> That actually made we wonder if this might become a problem, sooner or >>> later, and if we should be updating the build to use a more modern Node/NPM >>> version for our build? >>> >>> Any thoughts (or volunteers :-)) >>> -Matthias >>> >>> -- >>> 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 > -- Luk?? Fry? Software Engineer Red Hat Mobile | AeroGear.org, FeedHenry.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/aerogear-dev/attachments/20151201/282404e2/attachment-0001.html From matzew at apache.org Tue Dec 1 03:07:53 2015 From: matzew at apache.org (Matthias Wessendorf) Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2015 09:07:53 +0100 Subject: [aerogear-dev] Worth to update Node.js build for UPS Admin? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: sure, I was never saying it's a must - I was just evaluating if that's an option. Currently all works, but I fear that if we (for what ever reason) have to update a dependency, they won't support 0.10.x anymore :-) On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 8:59 AM, Lukas Fryc wrote: > It is definitely nice to have it upgraded (nothing urgent though), > > I would put some Component Upgrade issue down, and identify scope first. > > On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 2:54 AM, Luke Holmquist > wrote: > >> also reply !== volunteering :) :) >> >> >> On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 8:53 PM, Luke Holmquist >> wrote: >> >>> probably would be a good idea to try and update to the latest version. >>> JIRA? :) >>> >>> without looking at the dependencies, i'd imagine that some of them need >>> updating since there were breaking changes going from 0.10 to 0.12 >>> >>> any stack trace for the error. >>> >>> On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 5:41 PM, Matthias Wessendorf >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi folks, >>>> >>>> I was wondering if it makes sense to update the Node based build for >>>> the Admin UI of the UPS to use a slightly newer version of Node.js >>>> >>>> Currently we are using v0.10.31: >>>> >>>> https://github.com/aerogear/aerogear-unifiedpush-server/blob/master/admin-ui/pom.xml#L60 >>>> >>>> I changed that line to v5.1.0 and, to be honest, as expected, it did >>>> not work :-) But, surprisingly an update to something lower (e.g. 0.12.8) >>>> did also not work :-( >>>> >>>> That actually made we wonder if this might become a problem, sooner or >>>> later, and if we should be updating the build to use a more modern Node/NPM >>>> version for our build? >>>> >>>> Any thoughts (or volunteers :-)) >>>> -Matthias >>>> >>>> -- >>>> 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 >> > > > > -- > Luk?? Fry? > Software Engineer > Red Hat Mobile | AeroGear.org, FeedHenry.org > > _______________________________________________ > 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/20151201/4ace3994/attachment.html From lfryc at redhat.com Tue Dec 1 03:09:33 2015 From: lfryc at redhat.com (Lukas Fryc) Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2015 09:09:33 +0100 Subject: [aerogear-dev] Worth to update Node.js build for UPS Admin? In-Reply-To: References:

Message-ID: Right, good to know the impact beforehand. On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 9:07 AM, Matthias Wessendorf wrote: > sure, > > I was never saying it's a must - I was just evaluating if that's an > option. Currently all works, but I fear that if we (for what ever reason) > have to update a dependency, they won't support 0.10.x anymore :-) > > On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 8:59 AM, Lukas Fryc wrote: > >> It is definitely nice to have it upgraded (nothing urgent though), >> >> I would put some Component Upgrade issue down, and identify scope first. >> >> On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 2:54 AM, Luke Holmquist >> wrote: >> >>> also reply !== volunteering :) :) >>> >>> >>> On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 8:53 PM, Luke Holmquist >>> wrote: >>> >>>> probably would be a good idea to try and update to the latest version. >>>> JIRA? :) >>>> >>>> without looking at the dependencies, i'd imagine that some of them need >>>> updating since there were breaking changes going from 0.10 to 0.12 >>>> >>>> any stack trace for the error. >>>> >>>> On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 5:41 PM, Matthias Wessendorf >>> > wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi folks, >>>>> >>>>> I was wondering if it makes sense to update the Node based build for >>>>> the Admin UI of the UPS to use a slightly newer version of Node.js >>>>> >>>>> Currently we are using v0.10.31: >>>>> >>>>> https://github.com/aerogear/aerogear-unifiedpush-server/blob/master/admin-ui/pom.xml#L60 >>>>> >>>>> I changed that line to v5.1.0 and, to be honest, as expected, it did >>>>> not work :-) But, surprisingly an update to something lower (e.g. 0.12.8) >>>>> did also not work :-( >>>>> >>>>> That actually made we wonder if this might become a problem, sooner or >>>>> later, and if we should be updating the build to use a more modern Node/NPM >>>>> version for our build? >>>>> >>>>> Any thoughts (or volunteers :-)) >>>>> -Matthias >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> 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 >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Luk?? Fry? >> Software Engineer >> Red Hat Mobile | AeroGear.org, FeedHenry.org >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 > > _______________________________________________ > aerogear-dev mailing list > aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev > -- Luk?? Fry? Software Engineer Red Hat Mobile | AeroGear.org, FeedHenry.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/aerogear-dev/attachments/20151201/4517f2a1/attachment.html From matzew at apache.org Tue Dec 1 04:56:07 2015 From: matzew at apache.org (Matthias Wessendorf) Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2015 10:56:07 +0100 Subject: [aerogear-dev] AG Parent 0.2.18 - staging repository Message-ID: Ahoy! A new release of aerogear-parent was staged at: https://repository.jboss.org/nexus/content/repositories/jboss_releases_staging_profile-7238/ This is basically an increase of the KC used version (1.5.1). Note: due to a bug, we can not yet use 1.6. - but abstractj is planing to update to 1.7.x once there ;-) BTW. I'm considering to release it on Friday or next Monday. If you want the release to be postponed to another day, let me know. -- 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/20151201/9a727f0c/attachment.html From lholmqui at redhat.com Tue Dec 1 09:22:28 2015 From: lholmqui at redhat.com (Luke Holmquist) Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2015 09:22:28 -0500 Subject: [aerogear-dev] Worth to update Node.js build for UPS Admin? In-Reply-To: References:

Message-ID: ok, i'll check this out. looks like it is failing during minification On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 3:09 AM, Lukas Fryc wrote: > Right, good to know the impact beforehand. > > On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 9:07 AM, Matthias Wessendorf > wrote: > >> sure, >> >> I was never saying it's a must - I was just evaluating if that's an >> option. Currently all works, but I fear that if we (for what ever reason) >> have to update a dependency, they won't support 0.10.x anymore :-) >> >> On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 8:59 AM, Lukas Fryc wrote: >> >>> It is definitely nice to have it upgraded (nothing urgent though), >>> >>> I would put some Component Upgrade issue down, and identify scope first. >>> >>> On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 2:54 AM, Luke Holmquist >>> wrote: >>> >>>> also reply !== volunteering :) :) >>>> >>>> >>>> On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 8:53 PM, Luke Holmquist >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> probably would be a good idea to try and update to the latest >>>>> version. JIRA? :) >>>>> >>>>> without looking at the dependencies, i'd imagine that some of them >>>>> need updating since there were breaking changes going from 0.10 to 0.12 >>>>> >>>>> any stack trace for the error. >>>>> >>>>> On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 5:41 PM, Matthias Wessendorf < >>>>> matzew at apache.org> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Hi folks, >>>>>> >>>>>> I was wondering if it makes sense to update the Node based build for >>>>>> the Admin UI of the UPS to use a slightly newer version of Node.js >>>>>> >>>>>> Currently we are using v0.10.31: >>>>>> >>>>>> https://github.com/aerogear/aerogear-unifiedpush-server/blob/master/admin-ui/pom.xml#L60 >>>>>> >>>>>> I changed that line to v5.1.0 and, to be honest, as expected, it did >>>>>> not work :-) But, surprisingly an update to something lower (e.g. 0.12.8) >>>>>> did also not work :-( >>>>>> >>>>>> That actually made we wonder if this might become a problem, sooner >>>>>> or later, and if we should be updating the build to use a more modern >>>>>> Node/NPM version for our build? >>>>>> >>>>>> Any thoughts (or volunteers :-)) >>>>>> -Matthias >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> 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 >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Luk?? Fry? >>> Software Engineer >>> Red Hat Mobile | AeroGear.org, FeedHenry.org >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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 >> >> _______________________________________________ >> aerogear-dev mailing list >> aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev >> > > > > -- > Luk?? Fry? > Software Engineer > Red Hat Mobile | AeroGear.org, FeedHenry.org > > _______________________________________________ > aerogear-dev mailing list > aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/aerogear-dev/attachments/20151201/378d95f5/attachment-0001.html From vivek.pandey at pinelabs.com Wed Dec 2 01:20:28 2015 From: vivek.pandey at pinelabs.com (Vivek Pandey) Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2015 11:50:28 +0530 Subject: [aerogear-dev] Feature request : API for retrieving list of deleted installations Message-ID: <002e01d12cc9$8a3b0f30$9eb12d90$@pinelabs.com> Guys, I have created a new feature request AGPUSH-1544 for a scenario we encountered in our case. I think it would be useful for applications using UPS. Please let me know your thoughts on this. Thanks, Vivek From: mwessendorf at gmail.com [mailto:mwessendorf at gmail.com] On Behalf Of Matthias Wessendorf Sent: Tuesday, December 01, 2015 4:22 PM To: Vivek Pandey Subject: Re: UPS and AeroGear Hi Vivek, this is all great! Glad to hear things are working good! Do you mind sending this feedback to the dev list as well ? Also if you have a feature request, do not hesitate to actually create a JIRA ticket :-) Cheers! Matthias On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 11:15 AM, Vivek Pandey wrote: Hello Matthias, Things are great here. UPS currently powers 3 apps for us and we are hoping to add one more very soon. We are beginning to extensively use UPS for communicating with users of one of the apps. Currently installations registered in UPS are limited (approx. 10K), but we are hoping to add many more users. We already attempted upgrading to one of the pre-release versions of 1.1.0 in our test environments, and it is in our roadmap to upgrade to 1.1.0 Final very soon. One of the feedbacks I have is related to a functionality we had to build in our infrastructure. We needed a way to identify users who are uninstalling the applications. We figured the GCM/APNS responses indicating invalid tokens + inactivity could be a good way to do it. Exposing an API to give user aliases or push tokens which are no longer would be a good feature. Thanks again, Vivek From: mwessendorf at gmail.com [mailto:mwessendorf at gmail.com] On Behalf Of Matthias Wessendorf Sent: Tuesday, December 01, 2015 3:28 PM To: Vivek Pandey Subject: UPS and AeroGear Hi, Vivek! how are things? I wonder what version of the UPS you guys are on - I am hoping you are on 1.1.0.Final and enjoying the internal improvements to use JMS :-) BTw. I think you also noticed the increased activity on the ML, since our last UPS release. More releases will follow soon :-) Cheers! Matthias -- Matthias Wessendorf blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf _____ This message may contain privileged and confidential information and is solely for the use of intended recipient. The views expressed in this email are those of the sender and not of Pine Labs. The recipient should check this email and attachments for the presence of viruses / malwares etc. Pine Labs accepts no liability for any damage caused by any virus transmitted by this email. Pine Labs may monitor and record all emails. _____ -- Matthias Wessendorf blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf This message may contain privileged and confidential information and is solely for the use of intended recipient. The views expressed in this email are those of the sender and not of Pine Labs. The recipient should check this email and attachments for the presence of viruses / malwares etc. Pine Labs accepts no liability for any damage caused by any virus transmitted by this email. Pine Labs may monitor and record all emails. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/aerogear-dev/attachments/20151202/c1789948/attachment.html From oivind.hoff.johansen at adresseavisen.no Wed Dec 2 06:41:44 2015 From: oivind.hoff.johansen at adresseavisen.no (=?iso-8859-1?Q?=D8ivind_Hoff_Johansen?=) Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2015 11:41:44 +0000 Subject: [aerogear-dev] Long delay from first to last push message received on iOS devices Message-ID: <0b0d64de298e4d718d7e951cf61db162@IT-EXC-03.adresseavisen.no> Hi, we're experiencing a delay when sending push messages to iOS devices. Our biggest push application have 32690 iOS devices registered and a smaller amount of android devices. We see that the delay is up to 20 minutes from first to last on iOS everytime. We are using version 1.1.0-beta.4, and have upgraded from 1.0.2. Table ups_db_changelog have 135 rows Running wildfly 8.1.0 Final We had the same problem with 1.0.2 but then we could see the delay in the log output, now according to the logs it takes around 10 seconds. (see fine.log), we also see this in the network traffic out from the server. The only error we're seeing in the logs is on MonitoringThread-1 (MonitoringThread-1) Exception in thread "MonitoringThread-1" java.lang.NullPointerException (MonitoringThread-1) at org.jboss.aerogear.unifiedpush.message.sender.APNsPushNotificationSender$2.messageSendFailed(APNsPushNotificationSender.java:232) (MonitoringThread-1) at com.notnoop.apns.internal.ApnsConnectionImpl$2.run(ApnsConnectionImpl.java:199) (MonitoringThread-1) at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:745) Do you have any ideas on why this delay is happening, and how to solve it? Logs: http://static.polarismedia.no/apps/aero/fine.log http://static.polarismedia.no/apps/aero/wildfly.log http://static.polarismedia.no/apps/aero/serverr.log Regards, ?ivind From matzew at apache.org Wed Dec 2 07:38:21 2015 From: matzew at apache.org (Matthias Wessendorf) Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2015 13:38:21 +0100 Subject: [aerogear-dev] Long delay from first to last push message received on iOS devices In-Reply-To: <0b0d64de298e4d718d7e951cf61db162@IT-EXC-03.adresseavisen.no> References: <0b0d64de298e4d718d7e951cf61db162@IT-EXC-03.adresseavisen.no> Message-ID: Hallo ?ivind, I started looking at this, I noticed that a message (that's one or more device/message pairs) have been rejected by APNs. This causes a NPE. I have a few suggestions, would you mind resending the push, but start the WildFly server with a different system property? Can you pass the "aerogear.ios.batchSize", like: -Daerogear.ios.batchSize=2000 For example (not sure how exactly you boot WF): ./bin/standalone.sh -b 0.0.0.0 --server-config=standalone-full.xml -Daerogear.ios.batchSize=2000 The "-Daerogear.ios.batchSize=2000" shrinks the size of the tokens, per batch to 2k (10k is default). I am interested in if this helps. BTW. to address the NPE, I have proposed a fix: https://github.com/aerogear/aerogear-unifiedpush-server/pull/649 On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 12:41 PM, ?ivind Hoff Johansen < oivind.hoff.johansen at adresseavisen.no> wrote: > Hi, > we're experiencing a delay when sending push messages to iOS devices. > Our biggest push application have 32690 iOS devices registered and a > smaller amount of android devices. > We see that the delay is up to 20 minutes from first to last on iOS > everytime. > > We are using version 1.1.0-beta.4, and have upgraded from 1.0.2. Table > ups_db_changelog have 135 rows > Running wildfly 8.1.0 Final > > We had the same problem with 1.0.2 but then we could see the delay in the > log output, now according to the logs it takes around 10 seconds. (see > fine.log), we also see this in the network traffic out from the server. > > The only error we're seeing in the logs is on MonitoringThread-1 > > (MonitoringThread-1) Exception in thread "MonitoringThread-1" > java.lang.NullPointerException > (MonitoringThread-1) at > org.jboss.aerogear.unifiedpush.message.sender.APNsPushNotificationSender$2.messageSendFailed(APNsPushNotificationSender.java:232) > (MonitoringThread-1) at > com.notnoop.apns.internal.ApnsConnectionImpl$2.run(ApnsConnectionImpl.java:199) > (MonitoringThread-1) at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:745) > > > Do you have any ideas on why this delay is happening, and how to solve it? > > Logs: > http://static.polarismedia.no/apps/aero/fine.log > http://static.polarismedia.no/apps/aero/wildfly.log > http://static.polarismedia.no/apps/aero/serverr.log > > Regards, > ?ivind > > > _______________________________________________ > 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/20151202/8e89ff5d/attachment-0001.html From bruno at abstractj.org Thu Dec 3 08:21:43 2015 From: bruno at abstractj.org (Bruno Oliveira) Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2015 11:21:43 -0200 Subject: [aerogear-dev] AG Parent 0.2.18 - staging repository In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: ship it On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 7:56 AM, Matthias Wessendorf wrote: > Ahoy! > > A new release of aerogear-parent was staged at: > https://repository.jboss.org/nexus/content/repositories/jboss_releases_staging_profile-7238/ > > This is basically an increase of the KC used version (1.5.1). > Note: due to a bug, we can not yet use 1.6. - but abstractj is planing to > update to 1.7.x once there ;-) > > BTW. I'm considering to release it on Friday or next Monday. If you want > the release to be postponed to another day, let me know. > > -- > 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 From matzew at apache.org Thu Dec 3 08:31:59 2015 From: matzew at apache.org (Matthias Wessendorf) Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2015 14:31:59 +0100 Subject: [aerogear-dev] AG Parent 0.2.18 - staging repository In-Reply-To: References:

Message-ID: I think this pom bundle will hit Maven Central on Friday On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 2:21 PM, Bruno Oliveira wrote: > ship it > > On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 7:56 AM, Matthias Wessendorf > wrote: > > Ahoy! > > > > A new release of aerogear-parent was staged at: > > > https://repository.jboss.org/nexus/content/repositories/jboss_releases_staging_profile-7238/ > > > > This is basically an increase of the KC used version (1.5.1). > > Note: due to a bug, we can not yet use 1.6. - but abstractj is planing to > > update to 1.7.x once there ;-) > > > > BTW. I'm considering to release it on Friday or next Monday. If you want > > the release to be postponed to another day, let me know. > > > > -- > > 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/20151203/e352be77/attachment.html From edewit at redhat.com Fri Dec 4 04:31:28 2015 From: edewit at redhat.com (Erik Jan de Wit) Date: Fri, 4 Dec 2015 10:31:28 +0100 Subject: [aerogear-dev] Cordova push 2.0.4 release Message-ID: Hi all, There have been some cool new feature and some bug fixes added to the cordova push plugin that we would like to release. As as usual I've created a release branch to test called 2.0.4-release. Included in this release are the following: PTKeySummary [image: Major][image: Feature Request]AGCORDOVA-111 Add update alias and categories for windows [image: Major][image: Feature Request]AGCORDOVA-113 Stack messages on Android [image: Major][image: Bug]AGCORDOVA-120 NullReferenceException when delivering message to WP8 app on foreground [image: Major][image: Bug]AGCORDOVA-124 Cordova Push Plugin crashes Android app in background when a notification with an empty alert string is sent [image: Major][image: Bug]AGCORDOVA-125 Success callback only fired once. [image: Major][image: Feature Request]AGCORDOVA-126 Add ability to include alias and category on register [image: Major][image: Bug]AGCORDOVA-128 Windows 10 runtime error -- Cheers, Erik Jan -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/aerogear-dev/attachments/20151204/8e723337/attachment-0001.html From matzew at apache.org Fri Dec 4 04:34:47 2015 From: matzew at apache.org (Matthias Wessendorf) Date: Fri, 4 Dec 2015 10:34:47 +0100 Subject: [aerogear-dev] [Aerogear-users] Cordova push 2.0.4 release In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: yay! On Fri, Dec 4, 2015 at 10:31 AM, Erik Jan de Wit wrote: > Hi all, > > There have been some cool new feature and some bug fixes added to the > cordova push plugin that we would like to release. As as usual I've created > a release branch to test called 2.0.4-release. Included in this release are > the following: > > PTKeySummary > > > [image: Major][image: Feature Request]AGCORDOVA-111 > Add update alias and > categories for windows > > [image: Major][image: Feature Request]AGCORDOVA-113 > Stack messages on Android > > > [image: Major][image: Bug]AGCORDOVA-120 > NullReferenceException > when delivering message to WP8 app on foreground > > > [image: Major][image: Bug]AGCORDOVA-124 > Cordova Push Plugin > crashes Android app in background when a notification with an empty alert > string is sent > > [image: Major][image: Bug]AGCORDOVA-125 > Success callback only > fired once. > > [image: Major][image: Feature Request]AGCORDOVA-126 > Add ability to include > alias and category on register > > > [image: Major][image: Bug]AGCORDOVA-128 > Windows 10 runtime error > > > -- > Cheers, > Erik Jan > > _______________________________________________ > Aerogear-users mailing list > Aerogear-users at lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-users > > -- 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/20151204/1f193411/attachment.html From matzew at apache.org Fri Dec 4 09:33:32 2015 From: matzew at apache.org (Matthias Wessendorf) Date: Fri, 4 Dec 2015 15:33:32 +0100 Subject: [aerogear-dev] UPS: Changing response of variant endpoint for Network details updates? Message-ID: Hi, currently when updating the network details, we do a PUT and srver returns 204 - not content, see: https://github.com/aerogear/aerogear-unifiedpush-server/blob/master/jaxrs/src/main/java/org/jboss/aerogear/unifiedpush/rest/registry/applications/AndroidVariantEndpoint.java#L112-L142 I wonder if we should actually return the updated values as part of the the response - this would mean we will be consistent to the endpoint to update the secret. There we do a PUT as well, but reasonably return the updated entity: https://github.com/aerogear/aerogear-unifiedpush-server/blob/master/jaxrs/src/main/java/org/jboss/aerogear/unifiedpush/rest/registry/applications/AbstractVariantEndpoint.java#L61-L78 This means, it's also easier to actually integrate the entire REST APIs into other, larger systems. Any thoughts? -Matthias -- 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/20151204/a2e3e4ff/attachment.html From weil at redhat.com Fri Dec 4 09:42:39 2015 From: weil at redhat.com (Wei Li) Date: Fri, 4 Dec 2015 14:42:39 +0000 Subject: [aerogear-dev] UPS: Changing response of variant endpoint for Network details updates? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: +1. This is something we will need to integrate UPS with RHMAP. At the moment, when user updates the network details for android push, we don't get the updated data back from UPS, which means we can't update the the apps with the correct information. We can issue another GET request for it, but it is a PITA and ideally we would expect the PUT endpoint should return the full data rather than just a status code. Thanks. Regards, Wei Li On Fri, Dec 4, 2015 at 2:33 PM, Matthias Wessendorf wrote: > Hi, > > currently when updating the network details, we do a PUT and srver returns > 204 - not content, see: > > https://github.com/aerogear/aerogear-unifiedpush-server/blob/master/jaxrs/src/main/java/org/jboss/aerogear/unifiedpush/rest/registry/applications/AndroidVariantEndpoint.java#L112-L142 > > > I wonder if we should actually return the updated values as part of the > the response - this would mean we will be consistent to the endpoint to > update the secret. There we do a PUT as well, but reasonably return the > updated entity: > > https://github.com/aerogear/aerogear-unifiedpush-server/blob/master/jaxrs/src/main/java/org/jboss/aerogear/unifiedpush/rest/registry/applications/AbstractVariantEndpoint.java#L61-L78 > > This means, it's also easier to actually integrate the entire REST APIs > into other, larger systems. > > Any thoughts? > -Matthias > > -- > 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 > -- Wei Li Red Hat email address: wei.li at redhat.com Senior Software Engineer -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/aerogear-dev/attachments/20151204/91efb19d/attachment-0001.html From michael at 410labs.com Fri Dec 4 17:18:02 2015 From: michael at 410labs.com (Michael Doo) Date: Fri, 4 Dec 2015 17:18:02 -0500 Subject: [aerogear-dev] iOS OAuth2 redirect URIs Message-ID: Hello, I've managed to integrate the Aerogear iOS OAuth2 library pretty well into my app for Google accounts. However, for Outlook, their OAuth2 API only allow two redirect URIs: urn:ietf:wg:oauth:2.0:oob and HTTPS schemes, e.g., https://login.live.com/oauth20_desktop.srf, to which the authorization code will be attached. The important bit here is that they do not allow customization of the redirect URI to be something like '\(bundleString)://oauth2Callback' or 'fb\(clientId)://authorize/', which the OAuth2 library seems to need. The documentation doesn't seem to clearly state how this should or could be addressed. Since not every OAuth2 provider has allowed iOS bundle names as valid redirect URIs, it seems to me there should be a way to handle this. Best, Michael Doo -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/aerogear-dev/attachments/20151204/35c412d0/attachment.html From matzew at apache.org Mon Dec 7 10:32:08 2015 From: matzew at apache.org (Matthias Wessendorf) Date: Mon, 7 Dec 2015 16:32:08 +0100 Subject: [aerogear-dev] [Aerogear-users] iOS OAuth2 redirect URIs In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi, mind filing a JIRA ticket, if there is a bit of missing functionality for a more generic usage. I think we should not end up adding an Outlook speciifc class, but I agree that it might be handy to have a bit of more flexibility here On Fri, Dec 4, 2015 at 11:18 PM, Michael Doo wrote: > Hello, > > I've managed to integrate the Aerogear iOS OAuth2 library pretty well into > my app for Google accounts. However, for Outlook, their OAuth2 API only > allow two redirect URIs: urn:ietf:wg:oauth:2.0:oob and HTTPS schemes, e.g., > https://login.live.com/oauth20_desktop.srf, to which the authorization > code will be attached. The important bit here is that they do not allow > customization of the redirect URI to be something like > '\(bundleString)://oauth2Callback' or 'fb\(clientId)://authorize/', which > the OAuth2 library seems to need. > > The documentation doesn't seem to clearly state how this should or could > be addressed. Since not every OAuth2 provider has allowed iOS bundle names > as valid redirect URIs, it seems to me there should be a way to handle this. > > Best, > Michael Doo > > _______________________________________________ > Aerogear-users mailing list > Aerogear-users at lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-users > > -- 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/20151207/0ab59195/attachment.html From matzew at apache.org Mon Dec 7 10:32:32 2015 From: matzew at apache.org (Matthias Wessendorf) Date: Mon, 7 Dec 2015 16:32:32 +0100 Subject: [aerogear-dev] [Aerogear-users] iOS OAuth2 redirect URIs In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: for got the JIRA link: http://jira.jboss.org/browse/AGIOS On Mon, Dec 7, 2015 at 4:32 PM, Matthias Wessendorf wrote: > Hi, > > mind filing a JIRA ticket, if there is a bit of missing functionality for > a more generic usage. > > I think we should not end up adding an Outlook speciifc class, but I agree > that it might be handy to have a bit of more flexibility here > > On Fri, Dec 4, 2015 at 11:18 PM, Michael Doo wrote: > >> Hello, >> >> I've managed to integrate the Aerogear iOS OAuth2 library pretty well >> into my app for Google accounts. However, for Outlook, their OAuth2 API >> only allow two redirect URIs: urn:ietf:wg:oauth:2.0:oob and HTTPS schemes, >> e.g., https://login.live.com/oauth20_desktop.srf, to which the >> authorization code will be attached. The important bit here is that they do >> not allow customization of the redirect URI to be something like >> '\(bundleString)://oauth2Callback' or 'fb\(clientId)://authorize/', which >> the OAuth2 library seems to need. >> >> The documentation doesn't seem to clearly state how this should or could >> be addressed. Since not every OAuth2 provider has allowed iOS bundle names >> as valid redirect URIs, it seems to me there should be a way to handle this. >> >> Best, >> Michael Doo >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Aerogear-users mailing list >> Aerogear-users at lists.jboss.org >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-users >> >> > > > -- > 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 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/aerogear-dev/attachments/20151207/0f1be1e5/attachment.html From lfryc at redhat.com Mon Dec 7 11:16:13 2015 From: lfryc at redhat.com (Lukas Fryc) Date: Mon, 7 Dec 2015 17:16:13 +0100 Subject: [aerogear-dev] [Aerogear-users] Cordova push 2.0.4 release In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Nice stuff, Erik! On Fri, Dec 4, 2015 at 10:34 AM, Matthias Wessendorf wrote: > yay! > > On Fri, Dec 4, 2015 at 10:31 AM, Erik Jan de Wit > wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> There have been some cool new feature and some bug fixes added to the >> cordova push plugin that we would like to release. As as usual I've created >> a release branch to test called 2.0.4-release. Included in this release are >> the following: >> >> PTKeySummary >> >> >> [image: Major][image: Feature Request]AGCORDOVA-111 >> Add update alias and >> categories for windows >> >> [image: Major][image: Feature Request]AGCORDOVA-113 >> Stack messages on Android >> >> >> [image: Major][image: Bug]AGCORDOVA-120 >> NullReferenceException >> when delivering message to WP8 app on foreground >> >> >> [image: Major][image: Bug]AGCORDOVA-124 >> Cordova Push Plugin >> crashes Android app in background when a notification with an empty alert >> string is sent >> >> [image: Major][image: Bug]AGCORDOVA-125 >> Success callback only >> fired once. >> >> [image: Major][image: Feature Request]AGCORDOVA-126 >> Add ability to include >> alias and category on register >> >> >> [image: Major][image: Bug]AGCORDOVA-128 >> Windows 10 runtime error >> >> >> -- >> Cheers, >> Erik Jan >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Aerogear-users mailing list >> Aerogear-users at lists.jboss.org >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-users >> >> > > > -- > 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 > -- Luk?? Fry? Software Engineer Red Hat Mobile | AeroGear.org, FeedHenry.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/aerogear-dev/attachments/20151207/a3ed2ff2/attachment-0001.html From scm.blanc at gmail.com Wed Dec 9 03:16:23 2015 From: scm.blanc at gmail.com (Sebastien Blanc) Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2015 09:16:23 +0100 Subject: [aerogear-dev] Staging of UnifiedPush Java Sender 1.1.0.Final In-Reply-To: References:

Message-ID: FYI, The Forge Addon for the UPS Java Sender has been updated with the latest release : http://forge.jboss.org/addon/org.jboss.aerogear:unifiedpush This addon makes it really easy to add/integrate the Java Sender library to your existing JavaEE project, here a screencast I did earlier this year : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jwsmtCMNWuo On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 11:41 AM, Matthias Wessendorf wrote: > shipped > > On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 10:49 AM, Matthias Wessendorf > wrote: > >> here is the new staging repo: >> >> >> https://repository.jboss.org/nexus/content/repositories/jboss_releases_staging_profile-7104/ >> >> >> >> On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 10:49 AM, Matthias Wessendorf >> wrote: >> >>> this has been canceled >>> >>> On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 2:51 PM, Sebastien Blanc >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi Team ! >>>> >>>> I'm happy to announce that the Java Sender 1.1.0.Final has been staged. >>>> >>>> Please test the staged release : >>>> >>>> >>>> https://repository.jboss.org/nexus/content/repositories/jboss_releases_staging_profile-6292 >>>> >>>> On Thursday I'd like to press the magic button to release it to the wild >>>> >>>> Thanks ! >>>> >>>> Sebi >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> 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 >> > > > > -- > 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 > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/aerogear-dev/attachments/20151209/0a3f97d0/attachment.html From edewit at redhat.com Wed Dec 9 03:29:24 2015 From: edewit at redhat.com (Erik Jan de Wit) Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2015 09:29:24 +0100 Subject: [aerogear-dev] Cordova push 2.0.4 released Message-ID: Hi all, I've pushed the release button, again what has changed this release: Bug AGCORDOVA-120 - NullReferenceException when delivering message to WP8 app on foreground AGCORDOVA-124 - Cordova Push Plugin crashes Android app in background when a notification with an empty alert string is sent AGCORDOVA-125 - Success callback only fired once. AGCORDOVA-128 - Windows 10 runtime error Feature Request AGCORDOVA-111 - Add update alias and categories for windows AGCORDOVA-113 - Stack messages on Android AGCORDOVA-126 - Add ability to include alias and category on register *Happy coding!* -- Cheers, Erik Jan -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/aerogear-dev/attachments/20151209/55e78154/attachment.html From scm.blanc at gmail.com Wed Dec 9 03:32:25 2015 From: scm.blanc at gmail.com (Sebastien Blanc) Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2015 09:32:25 +0100 Subject: [aerogear-dev] Cordova push 2.0.4 released In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: yay ! It's already Christmas at AeroGear ! On Wed, Dec 9, 2015 at 9:29 AM, Erik Jan de Wit wrote: > Hi all, > > I've pushed the release button, again what has changed this release: > > Bug > > AGCORDOVA-120 - > NullReferenceException when delivering message to WP8 app on foreground > AGCORDOVA-124 - Cordova > Push Plugin crashes Android app in background when a notification with an > empty alert string is sent > AGCORDOVA-125 - Success > callback only fired once. > AGCORDOVA-128 - Windows > 10 runtime error > Feature Request > > AGCORDOVA-111 - Add > update alias and categories for windows > AGCORDOVA-113 - Stack > messages on Android > AGCORDOVA-126 - Add > ability to include alias and category on register > > *Happy coding!* > > -- > Cheers, > Erik Jan > > _______________________________________________ > aerogear-dev mailing list > aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/aerogear-dev/attachments/20151209/396db25a/attachment.html From matzew at apache.org Wed Dec 9 04:13:36 2015 From: matzew at apache.org (Matthias Wessendorf) Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2015 10:13:36 +0100 Subject: [aerogear-dev] Staging of UnifiedPush Java Sender 1.1.0.Final In-Reply-To: References:

Message-ID: now, with https://github.com/aerogear/aerogear-unifiedpush-server/pull/654 we can run against Docker, easily - perhaps worth a blog / screencast ? :) On Wed, Dec 9, 2015 at 9:16 AM, Sebastien Blanc wrote: > FYI, > > The Forge Addon for the UPS Java Sender has been updated with the latest > release : http://forge.jboss.org/addon/org.jboss.aerogear:unifiedpush > > This addon makes it really easy to add/integrate the Java Sender library > to your existing JavaEE project, here a screencast I did earlier this year > : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jwsmtCMNWuo > > > > On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 11:41 AM, Matthias Wessendorf > wrote: > >> shipped >> >> On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 10:49 AM, Matthias Wessendorf >> wrote: >> >>> here is the new staging repo: >>> >>> >>> https://repository.jboss.org/nexus/content/repositories/jboss_releases_staging_profile-7104/ >>> >>> >>> >>> On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 10:49 AM, Matthias Wessendorf >> > wrote: >>> >>>> this has been canceled >>>> >>>> On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 2:51 PM, Sebastien Blanc >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi Team ! >>>>> >>>>> I'm happy to announce that the Java Sender 1.1.0.Final has been staged. >>>>> >>>>> Please test the staged release : >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> https://repository.jboss.org/nexus/content/repositories/jboss_releases_staging_profile-6292 >>>>> >>>>> On Thursday I'd like to press the magic button to release it to the >>>>> wild >>>>> >>>>> Thanks ! >>>>> >>>>> Sebi >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> 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 >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> 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/20151209/3c799951/attachment-0001.html From oivind.hoff.johansen at adresseavisen.no Thu Dec 10 06:53:05 2015 From: oivind.hoff.johansen at adresseavisen.no (=?iso-8859-1?Q?=D8ivind_Hoff_Johansen?=) Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2015 11:53:05 +0000 Subject: [aerogear-dev] Long delay from first to last push message received on iOS devices Message-ID: <919666a7ec3844a7bd18680aadced890@IT-EXC-03.adresseavisen.no> Hi, Looks like decreasing the ios batch size did the trick, thanks :) People report that it now only takes seconds. Added "-Daerogear.ios.batchSize=2000" to standalone.conf Regards, ?ivind From matzew at apache.org Wed Dec 16 08:27:54 2015 From: matzew at apache.org (Matthias Wessendorf) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2015 14:27:54 +0100 Subject: [aerogear-dev] UPS: next releases and branches Message-ID: Hi folks, for early Jan, I'd like to get the UPS-1.1.1 out: https://issues.jboss.org/projects/AGPUSH/versions/12327457 Not sure we will be doing a 1.1.2 later, but maybe... given these JIRAs: https://issues.jboss.org/projects/AGPUSH/versions/12323762 The next minor version will be 1.2.0: https://issues.jboss.org/projects/AGPUSH/versions/12327301 However, I had quick chat w/ Lukas in the morning, that we already have KC version update on master, but that really should not be in a 1.1.x patch version. Here is the proposal of what to do: * I branch of master for a 1.1.x patch branch, and on that branch, I simply rewert the KC update. * Obviously on master we keep the update, but also update the version there to 1.2.0-SNAPSHOT Also, since "active" branches are a PITA (we had that on 1.0.x), the idea is that the 1.1.x branch will be deleted ASAP, e.g. once we get out 1.1.1 shipped. In case we do a 1.1.2, we'd simple create a new 1.1.x branch of the 1.1.1 TAG. But on master, things will be moving forward, towards UPS 1.2.0 Any thoughts? -Matthias -- 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/20151216/6840f779/attachment.html From lholmqui at redhat.com Wed Dec 16 09:12:00 2015 From: lholmqui at redhat.com (Luke Holmquist) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2015 09:12:00 -0500 Subject: [aerogear-dev] UPS: next releases and branches In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: sounds pretty good On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 8:27 AM, Matthias Wessendorf wrote: > Hi folks, > > for early Jan, I'd like to get the UPS-1.1.1 out: > https://issues.jboss.org/projects/AGPUSH/versions/12327457 > > Not sure we will be doing a 1.1.2 later, but maybe... given these JIRAs: > https://issues.jboss.org/projects/AGPUSH/versions/12323762 > > The next minor version will be 1.2.0: > https://issues.jboss.org/projects/AGPUSH/versions/12327301 > > However, I had quick chat w/ Lukas in the morning, that we already have KC > version update on master, but that really should not be in a 1.1.x patch > version. > > Here is the proposal of what to do: > * I branch of master for a 1.1.x patch branch, and on that branch, I > simply rewert the KC update. > * Obviously on master we keep the update, but also update the version > there to 1.2.0-SNAPSHOT > > Also, since "active" branches are a PITA (we had that on 1.0.x), the idea > is that the 1.1.x branch will be deleted ASAP, e.g. once we get out 1.1.1 > shipped. In case we do a 1.1.2, we'd simple create a new 1.1.x branch of > the 1.1.1 TAG. > > But on master, things will be moving forward, towards UPS 1.2.0 > > > Any thoughts? > > > -Matthias > > -- > 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 > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/aerogear-dev/attachments/20151216/6475d22d/attachment.html From bruno at abstractj.org Wed Dec 16 10:31:40 2015 From: bruno at abstractj.org (Bruno Oliveira) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2015 13:31:40 -0200 Subject: [aerogear-dev] UPS: next releases and branches In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Matthias, the overall plan looks good to me. Just a question to make sure I understood. - on master - Keycloak 1.7.0.Final - on 1.1.x branch - Keycloak 1.5.0.Final Is that correct? On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 11:27 AM, Matthias Wessendorf wrote: > Hi folks, > > for early Jan, I'd like to get the UPS-1.1.1 out: > https://issues.jboss.org/projects/AGPUSH/versions/12327457 > > Not sure we will be doing a 1.1.2 later, but maybe... given these JIRAs: > https://issues.jboss.org/projects/AGPUSH/versions/12323762 > > The next minor version will be 1.2.0: > https://issues.jboss.org/projects/AGPUSH/versions/12327301 > > However, I had quick chat w/ Lukas in the morning, that we already have KC > version update on master, but that really should not be in a 1.1.x patch > version. > > Here is the proposal of what to do: > * I branch of master for a 1.1.x patch branch, and on that branch, I simply > rewert the KC update. > * Obviously on master we keep the update, but also update the version there > to 1.2.0-SNAPSHOT > > Also, since "active" branches are a PITA (we had that on 1.0.x), the idea is > that the 1.1.x branch will be deleted ASAP, e.g. once we get out 1.1.1 > shipped. In case we do a 1.1.2, we'd simple create a new 1.1.x branch of the > 1.1.1 TAG. > > But on master, things will be moving forward, towards UPS 1.2.0 > > > Any thoughts? > > > -Matthias > > -- > 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 -- - abstractj From matzew at apache.org Wed Dec 16 11:12:49 2015 From: matzew at apache.org (Matthias Wessendorf) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2015 17:12:49 +0100 Subject: [aerogear-dev] UPS: next releases and branches In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 4:31 PM, Bruno Oliveira wrote: > Hi Matthias, the overall plan looks good to me. Just a question to > make sure I understood. > > - on master - Keycloak 1.7.0.Final > yes, and basically upgrading from current 1.5.0 to 1.7.0 - only on master - on 1.1.x branch - Keycloak 1.5.0.Final > no - will revert that particular fix on the 1.1.x branch, so that the KC update is "only" on master > > Is that correct? > > On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 11:27 AM, Matthias Wessendorf > wrote: > > Hi folks, > > > > for early Jan, I'd like to get the UPS-1.1.1 out: > > https://issues.jboss.org/projects/AGPUSH/versions/12327457 > > > > Not sure we will be doing a 1.1.2 later, but maybe... given these JIRAs: > > https://issues.jboss.org/projects/AGPUSH/versions/12323762 > > > > The next minor version will be 1.2.0: > > https://issues.jboss.org/projects/AGPUSH/versions/12327301 > > > > However, I had quick chat w/ Lukas in the morning, that we already have > KC > > version update on master, but that really should not be in a 1.1.x patch > > version. > > > > Here is the proposal of what to do: > > * I branch of master for a 1.1.x patch branch, and on that branch, I > simply > > rewert the KC update. > > * Obviously on master we keep the update, but also update the version > there > > to 1.2.0-SNAPSHOT > > > > Also, since "active" branches are a PITA (we had that on 1.0.x), the > idea is > > that the 1.1.x branch will be deleted ASAP, e.g. once we get out 1.1.1 > > shipped. In case we do a 1.1.2, we'd simple create a new 1.1.x branch of > the > > 1.1.1 TAG. > > > > But on master, things will be moving forward, towards UPS 1.2.0 > > > > > > Any thoughts? > > > > > > -Matthias > > > > -- > > 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 > > > > -- > - abstractj > _______________________________________________ > 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/20151216/a90b465d/attachment.html From bruno at abstractj.org Wed Dec 16 17:21:28 2015 From: bruno at abstractj.org (Bruno Oliveira) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2015 22:21:28 +0000 Subject: [aerogear-dev] UPS: next releases and branches In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Go ahead! On Wed, Dec 16, 2015, 2:12 PM Matthias Wessendorf wrote: > On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 4:31 PM, Bruno Oliveira > wrote: > >> Hi Matthias, the overall plan looks good to me. Just a question to >> make sure I understood. >> >> - on master - Keycloak 1.7.0.Final >> > > yes, and basically upgrading from current 1.5.0 to 1.7.0 - only on master > > - on 1.1.x branch - Keycloak 1.5.0.Final >> > > no - will revert that particular fix on the 1.1.x branch, so that the KC > update is "only" on master > > > >> >> Is that correct? >> >> On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 11:27 AM, Matthias Wessendorf >> wrote: >> > Hi folks, >> > >> > for early Jan, I'd like to get the UPS-1.1.1 out: >> > https://issues.jboss.org/projects/AGPUSH/versions/12327457 >> > >> > Not sure we will be doing a 1.1.2 later, but maybe... given these JIRAs: >> > https://issues.jboss.org/projects/AGPUSH/versions/12323762 >> > >> > The next minor version will be 1.2.0: >> > https://issues.jboss.org/projects/AGPUSH/versions/12327301 >> > >> > However, I had quick chat w/ Lukas in the morning, that we already have >> KC >> > version update on master, but that really should not be in a 1.1.x patch >> > version. >> > >> > Here is the proposal of what to do: >> > * I branch of master for a 1.1.x patch branch, and on that branch, I >> simply >> > rewert the KC update. >> > * Obviously on master we keep the update, but also update the version >> there >> > to 1.2.0-SNAPSHOT >> > >> > Also, since "active" branches are a PITA (we had that on 1.0.x), the >> idea is >> > that the 1.1.x branch will be deleted ASAP, e.g. once we get out 1.1.1 >> > shipped. In case we do a 1.1.2, we'd simple create a new 1.1.x branch >> of the >> > 1.1.1 TAG. >> > >> > But on master, things will be moving forward, towards UPS 1.2.0 >> > >> > >> > Any thoughts? >> > >> > >> > -Matthias >> > >> > -- >> > 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 >> >> >> >> -- >> - abstractj >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 > _______________________________________________ > aerogear-dev mailing list > aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/aerogear-dev/attachments/20151216/2ee27a72/attachment-0001.html From matzew at apache.org Thu Dec 17 04:02:27 2015 From: matzew at apache.org (Matthias Wessendorf) Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2015 10:02:27 +0100 Subject: [aerogear-dev] UPS: next releases and branches In-Reply-To: References:

Message-ID: Alright, here is the 1.1.x branch: https://github.com/aerogear/aerogear-unifiedpush-server/tree/1.1.x-dev and I did revert the KC update, on that branch: https://github.com/aerogear/aerogear-unifiedpush-server/pull/661 Also, master is now 1.2.0-SNAPSHOT: https://github.com/aerogear/aerogear-unifiedpush-server/commit/0d5c276db70b65e7cd607c98aae6f5b68109f757 This will, eventually also get the KC 1.7.0 update, that abstractj is working on On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 11:21 PM, Bruno Oliveira wrote: > Go ahead! > > On Wed, Dec 16, 2015, 2:12 PM Matthias Wessendorf > wrote: > >> On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 4:31 PM, Bruno Oliveira >> wrote: >> >>> Hi Matthias, the overall plan looks good to me. Just a question to >>> make sure I understood. >>> >>> - on master - Keycloak 1.7.0.Final >>> >> >> yes, and basically upgrading from current 1.5.0 to 1.7.0 - only on master >> >> - on 1.1.x branch - Keycloak 1.5.0.Final >>> >> >> no - will revert that particular fix on the 1.1.x branch, so that the KC >> update is "only" on master >> >> >> >>> >>> Is that correct? >>> >>> On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 11:27 AM, Matthias Wessendorf >>> wrote: >>> > Hi folks, >>> > >>> > for early Jan, I'd like to get the UPS-1.1.1 out: >>> > https://issues.jboss.org/projects/AGPUSH/versions/12327457 >>> > >>> > Not sure we will be doing a 1.1.2 later, but maybe... given these >>> JIRAs: >>> > https://issues.jboss.org/projects/AGPUSH/versions/12323762 >>> > >>> > The next minor version will be 1.2.0: >>> > https://issues.jboss.org/projects/AGPUSH/versions/12327301 >>> > >>> > However, I had quick chat w/ Lukas in the morning, that we already >>> have KC >>> > version update on master, but that really should not be in a 1.1.x >>> patch >>> > version. >>> > >>> > Here is the proposal of what to do: >>> > * I branch of master for a 1.1.x patch branch, and on that branch, I >>> simply >>> > rewert the KC update. >>> > * Obviously on master we keep the update, but also update the version >>> there >>> > to 1.2.0-SNAPSHOT >>> > >>> > Also, since "active" branches are a PITA (we had that on 1.0.x), the >>> idea is >>> > that the 1.1.x branch will be deleted ASAP, e.g. once we get out 1.1.1 >>> > shipped. In case we do a 1.1.2, we'd simple create a new 1.1.x branch >>> of the >>> > 1.1.1 TAG. >>> > >>> > But on master, things will be moving forward, towards UPS 1.2.0 >>> > >>> > >>> > Any thoughts? >>> > >>> > >>> > -Matthias >>> > >>> > -- >>> > 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 >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> - abstractj >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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 >> _______________________________________________ >> 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/20151217/fb184845/attachment.html From matzew at apache.org Thu Dec 17 05:25:25 2015 From: matzew at apache.org (Matthias Wessendorf) Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2015 11:25:25 +0100 Subject: [aerogear-dev] AG Parent 0.2.19 - staging repository Message-ID: Ahoy! A new release of aerogear-parent was staged at: https://repository.jboss.org/nexus/content/repositories/jboss_releases_staging_profile-7375/ This is basically an increase of the KC used version (1.7.0). BTW. I'm considering to release it on Friday. If you want the release to be postponed to another day, let me know. -- 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/20151217/785c5b34/attachment.html From matzew at apache.org Thu Dec 17 05:26:01 2015 From: matzew at apache.org (Matthias Wessendorf) Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2015 11:26:01 +0100 Subject: [aerogear-dev] AG Parent 0.2.19 - staging repository In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: btw. this only effets the master branch On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 11:25 AM, Matthias Wessendorf wrote: > Ahoy! > > A new release of aerogear-parent was staged at: > > https://repository.jboss.org/nexus/content/repositories/jboss_releases_staging_profile-7375/ > > This is basically an increase of the KC used version (1.7.0). > > BTW. I'm considering to release it on Friday. If you want > the release to be postponed to another day, let me know. > > -- > 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 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/aerogear-dev/attachments/20151217/93187588/attachment.html From avibelli at redhat.com Thu Dec 17 05:34:57 2015 From: avibelli at redhat.com (Andrea Vibelli) Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2015 03:34:57 -0700 (MST) Subject: [aerogear-dev] AG Parent 0.2.19 - staging repository In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1450348497496-12279.post@n5.nabble.com> Hi Matt, looks fine to me! Thanks! Andrea Matthias Wessendorf wrote > btw. this only effets the master branch > > On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 11:25 AM, Matthias Wessendorf < > matzew@ > > > wrote: > >> Ahoy! >> >> A new release of aerogear-parent was staged at: >> >> https://repository.jboss.org/nexus/content/repositories/jboss_releases_staging_profile-7375/ >> >> This is basically an increase of the KC used version (1.7.0). >> >> BTW. I'm considering to release it on Friday. If you want >> the release to be postponed to another day, let me know. >> >> -- >> 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 .jboss > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev -- View this message in context: http://aerogear-dev.1069024.n5.nabble.com/aerogear-dev-AG-Parent-0-2-19-staging-repository-tp12277p12279.html Sent from the aerogear-dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. From kpiwko at redhat.com Thu Dec 17 05:59:07 2015 From: kpiwko at redhat.com (Karel Piwko) Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2015 11:59:07 +0100 Subject: [aerogear-dev] AG Parent 0.2.19 - staging repository In-Reply-To: <1450348497496-12279.post@n5.nabble.com> References: <1450348497496-12279.post@n5.nabble.com> Message-ID: Looks good to me. Cheers, Karel On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 11:34 AM, Andrea Vibelli wrote: > Hi Matt, looks fine to me! > > Thanks! > Andrea > > > Matthias Wessendorf wrote > > btw. this only effets the master branch > > > > On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 11:25 AM, Matthias Wessendorf < > > > matzew@ > > > > > > wrote: > > > >> Ahoy! > >> > >> A new release of aerogear-parent was staged at: > >> > >> > https://repository.jboss.org/nexus/content/repositories/jboss_releases_staging_profile-7375/ > >> > >> This is basically an increase of the KC used version (1.7.0). > >> > >> BTW. I'm considering to release it on Friday. If you want > >> the release to be postponed to another day, let me know. > >> > >> -- > >> 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 .jboss > > > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev > > > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://aerogear-dev.1069024.n5.nabble.com/aerogear-dev-AG-Parent-0-2-19-staging-repository-tp12277p12279.html > Sent from the aerogear-dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > _______________________________________________ > aerogear-dev mailing list > aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/aerogear-dev/attachments/20151217/1c5710c5/attachment-0001.html From bruno at abstractj.org Thu Dec 17 10:05:55 2015 From: bruno at abstractj.org (Bruno Oliveira) Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2015 13:05:55 -0200 Subject: [aerogear-dev] AG Parent 0.2.19 - staging repository In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Ship it! On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 8:25 AM, Matthias Wessendorf wrote: > Ahoy! > > A new release of aerogear-parent was staged at: > https://repository.jboss.org/nexus/content/repositories/jboss_releases_staging_profile-7375/ > > This is basically an increase of the KC used version (1.7.0). > > BTW. I'm considering to release it on Friday. If you want > the release to be postponed to another day, let me know. > > -- > 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 -- - abstractj From matzew at apache.org Fri Dec 18 01:52:31 2015 From: matzew at apache.org (Matthias Wessendorf) Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2015 07:52:31 +0100 Subject: [aerogear-dev] APNs / HTTP2 Message-ID: Hi, Apple did announce the HTTP/2 support for APNs, and simplified certificate handling: https://developer.apple.com/news/?id=12172015b In AeroGear we do already have a ticket to work on this, and work will start 'soon'. Ideally it will be in 1.2.0. BTW. this also means we will be switching to pushy library, which I did some investigations on for current way of sending push as well. Regarding APNs APIs, unfortunately I don't see when Apple will disable the current way to send a push, but I guess it will happen at some point, and we don't want to be surprised by that ;-) Cheers, Matthias -- 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/20151218/cc7fb648/attachment.html From matzew at apache.org Fri Dec 18 09:28:52 2015 From: matzew at apache.org (Matthias Wessendorf) Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2015 15:28:52 +0100 Subject: [aerogear-dev] Long delay from first to last push message received on iOS devices In-Reply-To: <919666a7ec3844a7bd18680aadced890@IT-EXC-03.adresseavisen.no> References: <919666a7ec3844a7bd18680aadced890@IT-EXC-03.adresseavisen.no> Message-ID: Hi ?ivind, we are decreasing the number in the code base: https://github.com/aerogear/aerogear-unifiedpush-server/pull/663 I wonder if 2k is really the best value. Would you mind testing some configs, e.g. 3k or 4k via the system property? Thanks a lot! -Matthias On Thu, Dec 10, 2015 at 12:53 PM, ?ivind Hoff Johansen < oivind.hoff.johansen at adresseavisen.no> wrote: > Hi, > Looks like decreasing the ios batch size did the trick, thanks :) > People report that it now only takes seconds. > > Added "-Daerogear.ios.batchSize=2000" to standalone.conf > > > Regards, > ?ivind > > _______________________________________________ > 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/20151218/8fc72586/attachment.html From oivind.hoff.johansen at adresseavisen.no Fri Dec 18 09:44:53 2015 From: oivind.hoff.johansen at adresseavisen.no (=?utf-8?B?w5hpdmluZCBIb2ZmIEpvaGFuc2Vu?=) Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2015 14:44:53 +0000 Subject: [aerogear-dev] Long delay from first to last push message received on iOS devices Message-ID: <53ae947dab694666a63a7ce24dbda018@IT-EXC-03.adresseavisen.no> Hi, Sure, can do this after the holidays. January at the earliest. Do you have any way of measuring on what is the better value ? ?ivind Fra: mwessendorf at gmail.com [mailto:mwessendorf at gmail.com] P? vegne av Matthias Wessendorf Sendt: 18. desember 2015 15:29 Til: AeroGear Developer Mailing List; ?ivind Hoff Johansen Emne: Re: [aerogear-dev] Long delay from first to last push message received on iOS devices Hi ?ivind, we are decreasing the number in the code base: https://github.com/aerogear/aerogear-unifiedpush-server/pull/663 I wonder if 2k is really the best value. Would you mind testing some configs, e.g. 3k or 4k via the system property? Thanks a lot! -Matthias On Thu, Dec 10, 2015 at 12:53 PM, ?ivind Hoff Johansen > wrote: Hi, Looks like decreasing the ios batch size did the trick, thanks :) People report that it now only takes seconds. Added "-Daerogear.ios.batchSize=2000" to standalone.conf Regards, ?ivind _______________________________________________ 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/20151218/70fa2f0d/attachment.html From Matthias.Bourillon at saint-gobain.com Wed Dec 30 10:49:25 2015 From: Matthias.Bourillon at saint-gobain.com (Bourillon, Matthias) Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2015 15:49:25 +0000 Subject: [aerogear-dev] Push customization with Android background App Message-ID: <143D1BBAE1FDE0459ADC21668AADEFC58455B51A@EXMB2EU22.za.if.atcsg.net> Hello, I have carefully read and applied the procedure to use Aerogear Push in a Cordova / Ionic App (https://aerogear.org/docs/guides/aerogear-cordova/AerogearCordovaPush/). Everything is OK except that my onNotification() JS method is not called when my Android App is running in background. The notification is displayed as it arrives and I am not able to apply any logic before it reaches the notification bar. We are using push to send some instructions to our App which should not always be displayed as-is to end users. Is there a way to customize or apply some logic when an App is in background? Or is this a limitation we have to deal with? Thanks, Matthias -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/aerogear-dev/attachments/20151230/ec372604/attachment-0001.html