Re: [aerogear-dev] [Unified Push] Java Sender API

On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 10:04 AM, Sebastien Blanc <scm.blanc(a)gmail.com&gt;wrote: > > > > On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 9:53 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew(a)apache.org&gt;wrote: > >> >> >> >> On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 9:25 AM, Sebastien Blanc <scm.blanc(a)gmail.com&gt;wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> I start looking at the repo. I have some general questions and then >>> more (not that much implementation detailed ;) ) specific proposals >>> >>> * Is our final goal to propose an implementation that we really want >>> the developers to use or is it more providing a reference implementation of >>> the sender API and developer will most of the time implement their own ? >>> >> >> The goal is, to give them a Java Utility to use to for sending. If they >> want, they can still do the HTTP by hand. Ideally we have this "client" for >> other platforms as well: >> * Node.js, Ruby, PHP etc >> >> >> >> >>> * How are we going to secure the API ? >>> >> >> Once the endpoints are secured, we will leverage that on the client side >> (e.g. function to specifiy the "credentials") >> >> >>> >>> * The API looks like now "fire & forget", do we plan to change that ? >>> >> It is fire and forget. >> >> >>> I can imagine that people using the sender need to have some >>> "feedback/return value/response" to manage their flows ? >>> >> >> Well, we do not really have much control there. Apple, for instance, >> does also not really tell you: "I could not deliver the push message to Mr. >> XYZ". Similar is google. >> They all have "feedback" service, that's more "here is a list of >> invalid device tokens". This info should NEVER be returned, from our >> Sender-Endpoint. >> >> Other cloud providers do similar: HTTP 200 + "Thanks we got your job, it >> is now being processed by our system" >> > > I agree that we don't have control between "our" systems and > Google's/Apple's networks. But, between our push server and our backend > server, the chance is bigger that the dev has more control. > Not nessacarially, the PushEE could be run by the "ops department", and different groups, within one company just use it to send messages. > The thing is that the sender api now "swallow" the http status, just > making the http status available for the backend app using the sender API > will be a nice benefit (there could be no connection between our pushee and > our backend app for instance) ... > If PushEE is not reachable, the client would fail, and will(should:)) report that back. This like that (low level http), we should report back. but nothing about the actual send (the communication from PushEE -> PushNetworks)

-M > > >> >> >>> >>> * You say one will go away, why is that ? Do we want to lean toward a >>> single implementation ? >>> >> >> For Java, I do not see a reason in supporting two "client". I did start >> with AsyncHttpClient and RestEasy client. I was hoping to see odds/benefits >> in one.... >> Looking at the code, I think I do prefer using the RestEasy inside of >> our Java-Sender.... >> >> >> >>> We could propose different ones (and in different language, like a >>> vertx mod client) >>> >> >> of course, but that's that's outside of the "java lib" we are talking >> about here. Surely, we can have a vertx-sender, node-sender etc >> >> >>> >>> So, now a bit more specific : >>> I've been forking your repo : >>> https://github.com/sebastienblanc/ag-java-sender/tree/refactoring >>> >>> To factor more code and make the sender API really unit testable >>> (running without any server) I've moved a bit things and introduced a sort >>> of Client interface that will implement really the http client we will use, >>> this client is then injected in the sender interface. >>> >> >> that is nice. The project is simple now, and was written while I was >> hacking the sender endpoints - that way I could avoid sending lot's of >> CURLs ;-) >> >> >> >>> With Arquillian should be easy to add real integration tests. >>> >> >> sounds good >> >> >>> >>> Let's discuss ! >>> Sebi >>> >>> >>> On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 9:00 PM, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew(a)apache.org >>> > wrote: >>> >>>> Hello, >>>> >>>> a FIRST version of the Java Sender API is ready: >>>> https://github.com/matzew/ag-java-sender >>>> >>>> Two implementations, based on different Java HTTP clients: >>>> * RestEasy: >>>> >>>> https://github.com/matzew/ag-java-sender/blob/master/src/main/java/org/ae... >>>> * AsyncHttpClient: >>>> >>>> https://github.com/matzew/ag-java-sender/blob/master/src/main/java/org/ae... >>>> >>>> One will go away, time will tell... not important now... >>>> >>>> Tests: >>>> >>>> https://github.com/matzew/ag-java-sender/tree/master/src/test/java/org/ae... >>>> >>>> >>>> More functionality (e.g. selective send for deviceType, MobileVariant) >>>> will follow, hand in hand with the matching endpoints >>>> >>>> >>>> -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(a)lists.jboss.org >>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev >>>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> aerogear-dev mailing list >>> aerogear-dev(a)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(a)lists.jboss.org >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev >> > > > _______________________________________________ > aerogear-dev mailing list > aerogear-dev(a)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(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev