+1 on merging. From my experience having multiple locations where we are documenting the same project has created some unnecessary difficulties in terms of maintaining/managing documentation. 
Also Paul and John raised some valid points here in terms of building community/engagement in use of the product. It's never a fun experience when the documentation on a project is not good and it doesn't give a good impression to start.

On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 12:17 PM, Wojciech Trocki <wtrocki@redhat.com> wrote:

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Wei Li <weil@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 2:46 PM
Subject: Re: [feedhenry-dev] [aerogear-dev] Upstream Community Documentation
To: John Frizelle <jfrizell@redhat.com>
Cc: AeroGear Developer Mailing List <aerogear-dev@lists.jboss.org>, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew@apache.org>, feedhenry-dev@redhat.com

+1. Maintaining 2 communities with similar objectives are just too confusing to a lot of people. I would like to see them merged as well. 

On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 1:23 PM, John Frizelle <jfrizell@redhat.com> wrote:
Hi All,

I would like to get people's thoughts on the cost / benefit of continuing to maintain both the feedhenry and aerogear communities (mailing lists, IRC channels, web sites etc...). There seems to be a lot of cross over between the two (the are both mobile focused communities backed primarily by Red Hat) and I struggle to see what benefit we, or our community members, get from having our work spread across these two communities...

From my perspective, I would rather see one healthy, vibrant community that we can all get behind instead of the current fractured status where it is unclear what lives where and why.

Just my 2 cents...


John Frizelle
Chief Architect, Red Hat Mobile
Consulting Engineer

twitter: @johnfriz
skype: john_frizelle

On 23 November 2017 at 13:09, Ali Ok <aliok@redhat.com> wrote:

FYI, once I started this epic to improve and clean up AeroGear.org website: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/AEROGEAR-1760

If we would like to do it, we need to find out a group that takes ownership of the clean up. AeroGear people are now more spread than before.


On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 9:13 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew@apache.org> wrote:
Hi Paul,

lot's of content on the AeroGear website is out of date, due to lack of work in the past two years (see the planing page).

Note: the sync was a prototype, for real-time sync; based on different algorithms and papers in that area, but never went really anywere... 
I guess it's dead now.

Over the past two years we did work a bit on the AeroGear Push server, and their libraries (e.g. mobile client-side lib and server-side integrations for node/java).

Regarding Digger - it's a standalone project, under the aerogear realm - like push.  Both bits can be used completely independent. 

I think some content (e.g. sync) needs to be removed (while we can still keep the repos), but we should be perhaps focusing on AeroGear UPS and digger, for community offerings.

ag.org/push (like is)
ag.org/digger (with backgrounds motivations, Laura's videos etc)

Regarding feedhenry / mcp , just one comment: it does integrate w/ AG features, such as push or digger, and will IMO offer the integration parts (e.g. APBs etc)


On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 2:59 PM, Paul Wright <pwright@redhat.com> wrote:

Hi AeroGear, FeedHenry

As part of a review of Digger (Build Farm) docs,  I created a PR to attempt to improve user navigation of:


Feedback on that PR raised the question of general navigation of this web site:

* What should be in the Getting Started menu to help me get started with digger? (I think digger is more than a code snippet or library)

* If I'm interested in digger, should I expect any digger info under module or platform menu items?

* I sometimes navigate to a page, but can't remember how I navigated to it, then cannot find the info again.

These issues can be resolved, but will require a lot of effort, but another question is:

* Will it provide us a platform to build the community we want?

The web site looks great, and I learn a lot from browsing it (eg I didn't know about https://aerogear.org/sync/ until today), but I wonder if it is doing the job we want it to do? and how do we keep it up-to-date? (https://aerogear.org/docs/planning/)

Meanwhile over at:


Not much there at the moment, but it will be the location for mobile.next doc

* Do we want users switching from MCP doc on feedhenry.org over to digger doc on aerogear.org and back again for some fh.sync doc?

These are difficult and challenging questions, I don't expect them to be easy to resolve and I'm happy to agree with whatever the communities decide to do. All this mail hopes to do is to raise the question of

* How do we communicate the "mobile.next" (i.e. feedhenry mcp and aerogear digger) message as cleanly as possible?

(The real challenge occurs after that, convincing them to adopt mobile.next, but users will never adopt if they can't find answers  they hit the first stumbling block)



aerogear-dev mailing list


feedhenry-dev mailing list

feedhenry-dev mailing list

feedhenry-dev mailing list




Red Hat Mobile

weil@redhat.com    M: +353862393272    

feedhenry-dev mailing list



Red Hat Mobile

IM: wtrocki



Red Hat Mobile

Communications House, Cork Road

Waterford City, Ireland X91NY33

lfitzger@redhat.com    IM: lfitzgerald