Re: [aerogear-dev] GCM 3.0 and Instance ID

On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 4:35 PM, Summers Pittman <supittma(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: > > > On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 10:32 AM, Sebastien Blanc <scm.blanc(a)gmail.com&gt; > wrote: > >> if #3 is possible (check&ignore the ack backed into the library) I would >> go for this option as well. >> > The ACK is mostly ignored now. There is a log message saying that the > GCM handler couldn't process it but otherwise the application is > unaffected. > perfect, so #3 it is? :) So a bit of delay on 2.2.0, a little release note of no support of GCM 3 and afterwards do that in 2.2.1 (or 2.3.0) ? > >> On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 4:28 PM, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew(a)apache.org&gt; >> wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 4:03 PM, Summers Pittman <supittma(a)redhat.com&gt; >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Sooooo we have a 2.2.0 staged. Google has a ton of new functionality >>>> rolling out for GCM. >>>> >>>> We think that 2.2.0 works with it mostly correctly but we are finding >>>> some "gotchas". Notably it looks like Google is sending some ACK messages >>>> after we register that the library is ignoring. >>>> >>>> We will need to support InstanceID (tl;dr; Google is enhancing >>>> registraiton_id). Passos and I are still digesting the volumes of stuff >>>> being rolled out from IO so we can't really give too many details right now >>>> because we simply don't know them (And Google is still updating their docs, >>>> fixing links, etc). >>>> >>>> So the question to the list is : >>>> Do we delay 2.2.0 and include support for InstanceID and any other >>>> best practices Google has introduced or do we release 2.2.0, document / >>>> work around any gotchas and then prioritize GCM 3.0 support for 2.3.0? >>>> >>> >>> (assuming this is related to the NPE I am seeing in [1]) >>> >>> I think the ultimate goal for 2.2.0 should be to to not crash like in >>> [1]. >>> >>> I see three options: >>> 1) document the work-around ([2]) and release the _existing_ 2.2.0, as >>> is >>> -> The fact that the work-around needs to be added to (almost) all >>> apps, makes it an odd work-around (not saying it's a no-go) >>> 2) delay the 2.2.0 and get full GCM 3.0 support in there >>> -> IMO it's unknown how long that takes, and ideally our 2.2.0 >>> AGDroid-Push should be out once we have the UPS released (early July); This >>> also could mean a delay on our Cordova lib. >>> 3) Update 2.2.0 to ignore the ACK sent from GCM 3.0, and get a 2.2.x >>> (or 2.3.0) a bit later for full support on GCM 3.0 >>> -> IMO this allows us to release UPS 1.1.0 (and AGDroid-Push) in a >>> reasonable timeframe and moves the work-around into our library, and not >>> onto all the app developers. >>> >>> >>> My vote would be going w/ option #3, given the above reasoning and the >>> fact that we don't use any GCM 3.0 feature atm, it sounds fairly safe (at >>> least to me) doing the working inside of our library >>> >>> -Matthias >>> >>> [1] https://issues.jboss.org/browse/AGDROID-425 >>> [2] >>> https://github.com/jboss-mobile/unified-push-helloworld/commit/077bfdce89... >>> >>> >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> 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 >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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 >> > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 _______________________________________________ aerogear-dev mailing list aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev