Re: [aerogear-dev] WebSocket and AeroGear ?

On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 9:04 PM, Jay Balunas <jbalunas(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: > This is similar to what I was thinking as well. > > There are two main types of push; native & non-native, but I don't like those designations. It is really more like "live" & "background" push, referring to the state of the client. > > Live push == Application is open, and active on the client. Push msgs are routed to the application via more traditional long/short polling, websockets, etc... > > Background push == Application is closed, and not active on the client. Regular live push messages are not possible. The only way to communicate is via APN, GC native messaging (sorry web apps - no love). > > In an ideal world there would be no difference to the application developer using AeroGear API's (client or server). The server-side would know what clients are available, and the clients would be listening automatically. Sending a message would be agnostic for the server-side. > > Unfortunately this can not "fully" be the case as background/native messages have limitations on the content, client support, and delivery mechanisms. one option is, to "push / poll". The client gets a msg on what to fetch. When back online it performs a "normal" fetch/poll for the data in question

> So I think the best we can do is setup a "smart" message system that gets you pretty close with good fallback api's and checks for what sort of messages are possible, or configured. > > Make sense, or is this just a big ramble? :-) > > -Jay > > On Dec 5, 2012, at 2:14 AM, Matthias Wessendorf wrote: > >> well, >> >> the idea is to have a wrapper/hook for "push notification" (e.g. APN) >> in the notifier as well: >> * receiving 'native push' events, when the app is offline (inactive, >> not watching the tab/window) >> >> If an app is offline, you simple can't receive a websocket frame/msg. >> So push is needed to tell AG that is needs to fetch data for sync etc. >> >> -Matthias >> >> On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 4:51 PM, Burr Sutter <bsutter(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: >>> I am concerned about the words "push" and "notifier" as those can become confused with real "push notifications" which we will have to have a client API for in the future. >>> >>> >>> On Dec 3, 2012, at 2:46 AM, Matthias Wessendorf wrote: >>> >>>> any further comments? >>>> >>>> On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 9:51 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew(a)apache.org&gt; wrote: >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>> yesterday some folks of the team meet, to talk about WebSocket - more >>>>> generally (HTML5) connectivity. >>>>> >>>>> Here is a write-up from the meeting: >>>>> https://gist.github.com/dd6e3c2da08830776996 >>>>> >>>>> Feedback and comments are welcome - Please use the comment function on >>>>> that gist! >>>>> >>>>> Cheers! >>>>> Matthias >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> 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(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 > -- Matthias Wessendorf blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf