Matthias Wessendorf wrote
> On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 10:42 AM, mischa <

> mischa.neumann@

> > wrote:
>
>> Matthias Wessendorf wrote
>> > Ah, I think the delegate is the issue; because it lacks the FCM topic
>> code
>> > from Android SDK
>>
>> we had no problems with aerogear-unifiedpush-server-1.2.0-alpha.1
>> and not when naming the variants with
>>
>
> 1.1.2 and 1.2.0-alpha.1 is not containing FCM
>
>
>> aerogear-unifiedpush-server-1.1.3.Final
>>
>
> but FCM is included in 1.1.3 and master (1.2.0-alpha.2-SNAPSHOT)
>
>
> FCM registration is done here:
> https://github.com/aerogear/aerogear-android-push/blob/master/aerogear-android-push/src/main/java/org/jboss/aerogear/android/unifiedpush/fcm/AeroGearFCMPushRegistrar.java#L186-L191
>
> But... I wonder... if we can, or should, do something about that on the
> srver side... hrm...

I see:
    ... Sent push notification to GCM topic: /topics/PRODUCTS ...
and as no client didn't register with the help of aerogear-android-push for
this topic at Firebase, it wouldn't get any notifications.

then the frontend message "X receivers" is misleadingly as one receiver is a
FCM topic channel :-)

and it's not clear, why the UPS is behaving differently when the android
variant is directly targeted in the push request.

Mischa



--
View this message in context: http://aerogear-dev.1069024.n5.nabble.com/aerogear-dev-broken-push-notification-in-UPS-1-1-3-Final-tp12629p12643.html

Sent from the aerogear-dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
_______________________________________________
aerogear-dev mailing list
aerogear-dev@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev