On Monday, August 24, 2015, Luke Holmquist <lholmqui@redhat.com> wrote:


On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 1:45 PM, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew@apache.org> wrote:


On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 7:22 PM, Luke Holmquist <lholmqui@redhat.com> wrote:
so i decided to take a gander at the push client lib in the aerogear.js project.   Currently if someone would like to use it,  they have a couple options.

1. download the whole lib,
2. download a custom build from the website
3. download a custom build from bower
4. create a custom build from source

In the past i think i was against breaking out pieces of the JS lib into separate repo's since we could just use the AeroGearComponents repo i created for custom builds.  But i think with the state of the JS lib(not sure where it's going), it might make sense to, at least with the push lib(perhaps the simplePush polyfill also) to break those out into separate repo's similar to the other client projects.

I think the starting vision of the project has changed, so perhaps this change is good.(this should probably be a whole separate thread)

Now that Chrome and Safari have push in the browser, FF is getting it also very soon,  it's possible this part of the library will be used more


thoughts?

yeah, makes sense to separate it.
And while getting back at the JS push lib, due to more interest in browser based push, I think it would be good to revisit the security aspects, for device (installation) registration against UPS. 
yea,  this is an issue.  Not sure the best way to approach this though.  but thats a different conversation i think 

yep
 
 

-Luke  

_______________________________________________
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



--
Sent from Gmail Mobile