On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 4:34 PM, Corinne Krych <corinnekrych@gmail.com> wrote:
We had similar discussion in this previous thread [1]
If we go platform specific section, there are also some iOS only fields (for interactive notification, silent one) that should go in ios section.

yeah, that's probably true.
However, I always liked the unified API, making it somewhat simple to reach a lot of platforms with a simple request to the UPS. If we add more and more nested objects (e.g. android, windows, ios), it can go wild, pretty easy.

Perhaps for more complex messages, this might be needed :-/



 

++
Corinne
[1] http://aerogear-dev.1069024.n5.nabble.com/aerogear-dev-message-format-change-proposal-td8977.html

> On 08 Jan 2015, at 16:17, Erik Jan de Wit <edewit@redhat.com> wrote:
>
>
>>
>> We would need to setup a backward-compatibility layer and thus
>> cluttering code. The benefit is a clean API though.
>>
> This is not an issue as we have a filter in place that converts from the
> old api to the new one.
> _______________________________________________
> aerogear-dev mailing list
> aerogear-dev@lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev


_______________________________________________
aerogear-dev mailing list
aerogear-dev@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