Re: [aerogear-dev] Chrome Push Messages

Envoyé de mon iPhone Make sense. Same for APNs with Safari/macOS I presume ? > >>> Sebi >>>>>> On Fri, Sep 5, 2014 at 12:38 PM, Daniel Passos <daniel(a)passos.me&gt; wrote: >>> +1 to GCM logo >>>>>> On Sep 3, 2014 5:28 PM, "Sébastien Blanc" <scm.blanc(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: >>>> Looks like there is a gcm logo but it is not really nice and I can not find it with a decent resolution >>>> <logo.png> >>>>>>> Envoyé de mon iPhone >>>>>>>> Le 3 sept. 2014 à 21:32, Lukáš Fryč <lukas.fryc(a)gmail.com&gt; a écrit : >>>>>>>>> From the UI perspective, Android/Chrome merge has few options: >>>>>>>>> 1. merged half-Android / half-Chrome logo (+ "Android / Chrome" as a description) >>>>>>>>> 2. use one radio button, but two rows with two logos (Android, Chrome) >>>>>>>>> 3. use Google logo ("G"? [1]) (and "Google Cloud Messaging" description) >>>>>>>>>>>>> Anyway, in any case it won't be as nice and polished as it is now. :-) >>>>>>>>>>>>> [1] https://www.google.com/search?q=g+google&source=lnms&tbm=isch&... >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 7:48 PM, Lucas Holmquist <lholmqui(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: >>>>>> So to follow up on this, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Chrome Packaged Applications, no recommend to use the same GCM network for Android when sending push notifications. >>>>>>>>>>> Currently in the UnifiedPush Server, a user can use the Android variant to use this new API now. >>>>>>>>>>> I think we should rename the AndroidVariant.class and related stuff to GCMVariant . >>>>>>>>>>> I created this Task to track the changes, https://issues.jboss.org/browse/AGPUSH-928 since we need to deprecate the current Chrome implementation and update the UI’s for the new way. >>>>>>>>>>> i’m wondering for the “Create Variant” dialog, for Android, we would need to change the name to GCM, but for the icon’s i wonder how it would look to put both Android and Chrome icons, side by side >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Aug 27, 2014, at 2:19 PM, Lucas Holmquist <lholmqui(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Aug 27, 2014, at 2:15 PM, Lukáš Fryč <lukas.fryc(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hey Luke, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ad) Variants >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it would be ideal if we could just use the same variant! >>>>>>>>>>>>> yea, it’s looking like it will be the same thing, we might just have to make a note of it on the UI >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ad) Compatibility >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I would say we should preserve the compatibility with 1.x as long as it does not make much efforts to keep both supported. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If it would be too much hassle, let's remove it in 1.1. >>>>>>>> Chrome is updated pro-actively anyway, so no one will hear about the old API in few months. >>>>>>>>>>>>> exactly, so maybe a warning or something >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ~ Lukas >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 3:28 PM, Lucas Holmquist <lholmqui(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: >>>>>>>>> Hello, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> now that the 1.0.0-final is pretty much out for the UnifiedPush Server, i’m starting to look at the new API that Chrome apps use for sending push notifications. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the TL;DR of it is, it’s basically the same as Android now.( no more refresh tokens and access tokens and such ) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So the question is, do we need to have a deprecation period on what is currently there? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The v1 of the chrome pushMessaging api has become legacy and it is recommended to use the new stuff. https://developer.chrome.com/apps/cloudMessagingV1 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> While i have looked to deeply, it’s possible we can use the same “Variant” structure for Chrome Apps, Since they will be using the same Network >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wdyt? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -Luke >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>>> 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 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> 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 >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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