On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 9:19 AM, Jose Miguel Gallas Olmedo <
jgallaso(a)redhat.com> wrote:
not sure if we should delete it yet - I think it was written by QE to test
> GCMv2 - but push server is now GCMv3/FCM compliant. I think there is some
> features missing there. Perhaps it's still good - not really sure.
Actually, we could keep the old gcm-proxy as well. The repo is
"push-network-proxies" which means many proxies. We could store the new one
under "fcm-wiremock" and the old one under "gcm-java"
+1
but for this, I think, we ought to extract GCM logic from the
current
project, leaving only APNS stuff.
no, not just APNs, IMO
push-network-proxies/
fcm-wiremock/
...
apns-java/
...
gcm-java/
...
push-network-proxies-template.yml
I think this is a good structure
In the future we might want to add new different implementations (or new
proxies) so it makes sense to me to have push-network-proxies as an
extensible repository, not as a only-2-proxies one.
On 24 June 2017 at 15:33, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew(a)apache.org> wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, Jun 23, 2017 at 4:08 PM, Jose Miguel Gallas Olmedo <
> jgallaso(a)redhat.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I recently create a Docker image of our push FCM proxy, made with
>> Wiremock. Since we are no longer using the FCM proxy in
>>
https://github.com/aerogear/push-network-proxies (even the Dockerfile
>> there only consider APNs) I think we could remove it from there and
>> refactor the repository like this:
>>
>
> not sure if we should delete it yet - I think it was written by QE to
> test GCMv2 - but push server is now GCMv3/FCM compliant. I think there is
> some features missing there. Perhaps it's still good - not really sure.
>
> But if Wiremock offers what we need -> fine, better to use things that
> are supported through a larger community ;-)
>
>
>>
>> push-network-proxies/
>> fcm/
>> Dockerfile
>> ...
>> apns/
>> Dockerfile
>> ...
>> push-network-proxies-template.yml
>>
>> So that we have everything in the same place. I also made a template for
>> Openshift so that we can setup a testing environment for UPS quickly. I
>> think that's the ultimate point of having the mocks together.
>>
>
> I like that, having this structure, where FCM is based on Wiremock,
> right?
>
>
>>
>> WDYT?
>>
>> --
>>
>> JOSE MIGUEL GALLAS OLMEDO
>>
>> ASSOCIATE QE, mobile
>>
>> Red Hat
>>
>> <
https://www.redhat.com/>
>>
>> M: +34618488633 <
http://redhatemailsignature-marketing.itos.redhat.com/>
>>
>> <
https://red.ht/sig>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/
> twitter:
http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>
> _______________________________________________
> aerogear-dev mailing list
> aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
>
--
JOSE MIGUEL GALLAS OLMEDO
ASSOCIATE QE, mobile
Red Hat
<
https://www.redhat.com/>
M: +34618488633 <
http://redhatemailsignature-marketing.itos.redhat.com/>
<
https://red.ht/sig>
_______________________________________________
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/
twitter:
http://twitter.com/mwessendorf