Sorry pre coffee reading comprehension. I thought you were talking about for registration flavored things for some reason.
On Wed, Feb 4, 2015 at 3:56 PM, Summers Pittman <supittma@redhat.com> wrote:
On 02/03/2015 04:13 PM, Matthias Wessendorf wrote:
This should be OK, I will need to review the Android code.Hi,
I recently noticed that we are (IMO) incorrectly returning 200 (OK):
Since we really do submit an async job here, and its processing may not have been started when we do return the 200 (OK), I'd like to propose a slight change here to instead use 202 (Accepted):
If the team is OK (ha ha) with this, I will track this in JIRA
I hope no Android code is actually using the SENDER api :-)
Is there any downside to accepting results on the client side? (As opposed to configuring the library comply with a certain version of UPS)
Not sure what you are asking here
-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@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
-- Summers Pittman >>Phone:404 941 4698 >>Java is my crack.
_______________________________________________
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
_______________________________________________ aerogear-dev mailing list aerogear-dev@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
-- Summers Pittman >>Phone:404 941 4698 >>Java is my crack.