why 'recordId' instead of 'primaryKey'?
On Sunday, September 16, 2012, Matthias Wessendorf wrote:
Thx!
On Sat, Sep 15, 2012 at 8:27 PM, Kris Borchers <kris@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> On Sep 15, 2012, at 12:13 PM, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew@apache.org> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Saturday, September 15, 2012, Kris Borchers wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Sep 15, 2012, at 10:53 AM, Glen Daniels <glen@thoughtcraft.com> wrote:
>>
>> > Hey Matthias,
>> >
>> > Thanks for taking a look at the prototype!
>> >
>> > On 9/15/12 6:12 AM, Matthias Wessendorf wrote:
>> >> I took a quick look at the Android API. Below are a few questions:
>> >>
>> >> * AeroGear.java
>> >> - Is the class 'just' a util, that offers static methods? If so,
>> >> should have a private ctor and be final (since a private default ctor
>> >> prevents inheritance anyways)
>> >
>> > Yup, that's the intent, but since it's just a "sketch" I didn't put that
>> > in - will do.
>> >
>> >> - is the API_KEY really needed? Not sure, but I think that (the
>> >> API_KEY) is _perhaps_ something on-top of a networking client lib,
>> >> needed when entering the real 'BaaS' market, where our lib. is used
>> >> against a (specific) 'backend provider'.
>> >
>> > Right, I was pretty much following the common BaaS pattern. It's
>> > certainly not necessary immediately, but once we start supporting OAuth
>> > we'll want something like that anyway, so I put it in as a placeholder.
>> > Easy to remove if we decide we don't want it for now.
>> >
>> >> * Utils.java
>> >> - related to the API_key, I think the X-AeroGear-Client header needs
>> >> to be defined/discussed - but IMO the AeroGear client lib should work
>> >> also without such a key, when accessing a simple JAX-RS (read:
>> >> RestEasy) service; Of course, when 'cloud provider' start using our
>> >> bits, something like API_KEY is a must.
>> >
>> > +1
>> >
>> >> - the 'delete' is public; the others (e.g. post) not...
>> >
>> > No semantic significance there. Should probably all be package access,
>> > since AeroGear is the user-facing class.
>> >
>> >> * Pipe.java
>> >> - how to update an existing item?
>> >> For instance in JS/iOS we use save which does an 'add' if there is no
>> >> _id_ or issues an 'update' if the entity already exisits (e.g. has an
>> >> _id_).
>> >
>> > Yep, will do that. (although note that "_id_" or "_id" or whatever we
>> > use is another point of coupling ;) )
>> I don't think it does. In JS, I have made it so that what ever name you
>> use on the server to denote an "id", you can tell the client lib what that
>> name is. So whether the id field is named id or recordId, or blahblah, that
>> is configurable when a pipe is created.
>
>
> Can you post a snippet for that?
>
> Not exactly sure what you want to see and iOS/Android are probably going to
> have to be different but hope this helps a little.
> https://gist.github.com/3729174
>
>
> Thx,
> Matthias
>
>
>
>>
>>
>> >
>> >> There is no concept of a 'pipeline', but I guess (at least for now) on
>> >> "Java" (aka Android) a typed list (e.g. List<Pipe> pipeline;) is good
>> >> enough, right?
>> >> But on the other hand, than it's up to the user of the api to 'manage'
>> >> all the pipes (server connections).
>> >
>> > Right. What sort of "management" do you imagine, other than
>> > factory-style creation? Pipes as they stand are extremely "cheap"
>> > objects (no db connections, network connections, threads, etc).
>> >
>> > Best,
>> > --Glen
>> >
>> >
>> > ___Matthias Wessendorf
blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf