Re: [aerogear-dev] Android keys (Re: AeroGear Push Message Format)

On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 4:42 PM, Daniel Passos <daniel(a)passos.me <mailto:daniel@passos.me>> wrote: We don't have special words on Android, but we can use the same of iOS and shoot the same behaviors. wdyt? Like you did on the PR, for "alert", right ? I personally do like that very much

On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 9:15 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew(a)apache.org <mailto:matzew@apache.org>> wrote: Summers, Passos, wondering if we should/could honor "android" specific keys as well (similar to the iOS keys that we "honor") See: https://github.com/aerogear/aerogear.org/blob/master/docs/specs/aerogear-... -Matthias On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 5:36 PM, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew(a)apache.org <mailto:matzew@apache.org>> wrote: reminder, that ID is just the primary key :-) meaningful are "pushApplicationID" and "variantID" On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 3:17 PM, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew(a)apache.org <mailto:matzew@apache.org>> wrote: Luke once this landed, it will be "pushApplicationID" and "variantID" - the ID is than meaningless (at least for PushEE server). -M On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 6:45 PM, Lucas Holmquist <lholmqui(a)redhat.com <mailto:lholmqui@redhat.com>> wrote: plus plus On May 31, 2013, at 12:39 PM, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew(a)apache.org <mailto:matzew@apache.org>> wrote: > https://issues.jboss.org/browse/AGPUSH-86 > > > On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 6:25 PM, Luke Holmquist > <lholmqui(a)redhat.com > <mailto:lholmqui@redhat.com>> wrote: > > > > Sent from my iPhone > > On May 31, 2013, at 12:24 PM, Matthias > Wessendorf <matzew(a)apache.org > <mailto:matzew@apache.org>> wrote: > >> somehow the device needs to say: "I belong >> to android variant" >> >> besides the @Id /PK, we can have a second >> field / column that represents: >> * PushAppID >> * VariantID >> > Yup. Having these would solve that > > >> >> Was that your question? >> >> On Friday, May 31, 2013, Lucas Holmquist wrote: >> >> something that i was thinking about >> after doing some examples is that i'm >> not sure how i feel about using the PK's >> of each table as the identifier to >> register/broadcast clients. >> >> We are sort of giving meaning to data >> that really shouldn't have meaning. it >> should really only be used to identify >> the row. It might be better to have >> another key on each table/object that is >> the identifier. >> >> So in one of the examples i did, the >> app on the device will register the >> device with the push server, but i >> needed to also include the id of the >> variant instance >> >> i guess i'm thinking if someone migrates >> their database, these keys could get >> messed up. >> >> >> wdyt? >> >> >> On May 28, 2013, at 2:53 AM, Matthias >> Wessendorf <matzew(a)apache.org&gt; wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 8:51 AM, >>> Corinne Krych <corinnekrych(a)gmail.com&gt; >>> wrote: >>> >>> in selective push is: >>> ==> variant: iOS + alias: mwessendorf >>> a valid criteria too? >>> >>> >>> >>> yes. let me update the related doc(s) >>> >>> >>> >>> On 28 May 2013 08:51, Corinne Krych >>> <corinnekrych(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On 28 May 2013 08:48, Matthias >>> Wessendorf <matzew(a)apache.org&gt; >>> wrote: >>> >>> TYPO: >>> ==> variant: iOS (since a >>> PushAPP _might_ have only >>> one iOS variant) + >>> deviceType:iPadMini + >>> alias: mwessendorf >>> or >>> ==> variant: iOS (since a >>> PushAPP _might_ have only >>> one iOS variant) + >>> deviceType:iPhone + alias: >>> mwessendorf >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Tue, May 28, 2013 at >>> 8:43 AM, Matthias >>> Wessendorf >>> <matzew(a)apache.org&gt; wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Tue, May 28, 2013 at >>> 12:00 AM, Corinne Krych >>> <corinnekrych(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: >>> >>> When doing >>> selective push >>> query, is there any >>> overlap between >>> mobile variant >>> (which I understand >>> like mobile type >>> which contains >>> certificates) and >>> device type? >>> >>> >>> MobileVariant (or call >>> it type) is something >>> like "Android", or "iOS". >>> deviceTypes would be >>> iPad, iPod, iPhone, >>> iWatch :) - or >>> "Android Table", >>> "Andrpid phone", >>> android what not >>> >>> >>> Sure.... ideally there >>> are several variants: >>> - iOS iPhone >>> 5 optimised app in the >>> app store >>> - iOS iPhone 4s >>> optimised app in the >>> app store >>> - iOS iPhone 3 >>> optimised app in the >>> app store >>> - iOS iPad mini >>> optimised app in the >>> app store >>> etc :) >>> >>> But, if there is only >>> one variant, it's >>> totally valid to >>> install an iOS >>> application (from the >>> appstore), on an iPad >>> and an iPhone; >>> >>> Both aimed at >>> defining categories. >>> Are those >>> categories defined >>> and fixed in the >>> spec or can they be >>> extended? >>> >>> >>> >>> I don't understand >>> categories, here >>> >>> Can we do a >>> selective push >>> based on >>> mobileType=mobile >>> variant and >>> alias=john@gmail? >>> _______________________________________________ aerogear-dev mailing list aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org <mailto: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(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev