Hello Guys, Last Tuesday during our (favourite) iOS meeting [1] [2] we talked about modularization. We agreed with Android team modularization is scheduled for 2.0. For iOS we have several actions: 1. rename existing repos (too bad we don’t follow well Android convention) • aerogear-ios-crypto • aerogear-ios-push (thanks passos for the suggestion) • aerogear-ios-otp • aerogear-ios-xcode-template • aerogear-ios-cookbook Since we’re talking about renaming, what about dropping “arerogear” for the repo name? all those repos belong to aerogear organization anyway. Maybe removing the aerogear part will stress more the small libraries aspect. Maybe sth we already discussed but can’t remember/find it. wdyt?

2. Pipe and Store deprecated. All aerogear-ios we’ll stick to 1.7 version and will be marked deprecated. But …. don’t be scared new modules will replace them: • aerogear-ios-http : Lightweight lib around NSURLSession to ease HTTP calls with pluggable request and response Serializers. Very very Draft version [3] with some cookbook recipe [4]. With this module we will work directly with NSURLSession (iOS foundation networking) instead of using AFNetworking. Sure Andrea will like it: no dependency :) • aerogear-ios-oauth2 : dependent on aerogear-ios-http, bring all the good stuff like AccountManager, OAuth2 extensible adapters, fluid http post/get ... • aerogear-ios-storage usage of incrementalStorage to plug into Core Data

Those modules will be written in Swift code. We’ll test them both in iOS7 and iOS8. 3. Cookbook recipes rpo • tag our repo 1.7: we didn’t have a tag strategy for cookbook demos but with the move from 1.X to 2.) I think we should * Swift demo naming convention add “-swift” for Swift version like we did [5]. We should also append “-objc” to other recipes to be consistent. 4. Differentiate Swift vs Objective-C libs How to differenctiate Swift code. Specially for aerogear-ios-push which will be declined in 2 versions? One suggestion from Matthias was to have 2 separate branches. master -> objc-c until iOS8 is released and stable. I’m +1 with that idea.

Let me know if you have suggestions/objections. When we reach an agreement, I’ll create associated JIRA. ++ Corinne [1] http://oksoclap.com/p/aerogear_ios_meeting_01072014 [2] http://transcripts.jboss.org/meeting/irc.freenode.org/aerogear/2014/aerog... [3] https://github.com/corinnekrych/aerogear-ios-http [4] https://github.com/corinnekrych/Weather [5] https://github.com/aerogear/aerogear-push-helloworld/tree/master/ios-swift _______________________________________________ aerogear-dev mailing list aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev

>Phone:404 941 4698 >Java is my crack.

On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 6:20 PM, Corinne Krych <corinnekrych(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: Hello Guys, Last Tuesday during our (favourite) iOS meeting [1] [2] we talked about modularization. We agreed with Android team modularization is scheduled for 2.0. For iOS we have several actions: 1. rename existing repos (too bad we don’t follow well Android convention) • aerogear-ios-crypto • aerogear-ios-push (thanks passos for the suggestion) • aerogear-ios-otp • aerogear-ios-xcode-template • aerogear-ios-cookbook Since we’re talking about renaming, what about dropping “arerogear” for the repo name? all those repos belong to aerogear organization anyway. Maybe removing the aerogear part will stress more the small libraries aspect. Maybe sth we already discussed but can’t remember/find it. wdyt? -9001 for dropping “arerogear” for the repo name 2. Pipe and Store deprecated. All aerogear-ios we’ll stick to 1.7 version and will be marked deprecated. But …. don’t be scared new modules will replace them: • aerogear-ios-http : Lightweight lib around NSURLSession to ease HTTP calls with pluggable request and response Serializers. Very very Draft version [3] with some cookbook recipe [4]. With this module we will work directly with NSURLSession (iOS foundation networking) instead of using AFNetworking. Sure Andrea will like it: no dependency :) • aerogear-ios-oauth2 : dependent on aerogear-ios-http, bring all the good stuff like AccountManager, OAuth2 extensible adapters, fluid http post/get ... • aerogear-ios-storage usage of incrementalStorage to plug into Core Data Very nice! Those modules will be written in Swift code. We’ll test them both in iOS7 and iOS8.

Sorry but It's not clear for me. We'll not support Objective-C for that? Or will support both?

3. Cookbook recipes rpo • tag our repo 1.7: we didn’t have a tag strategy for cookbook demos but with the move from 1.X to 2.) I think we should * Swift demo naming convention add “-swift” for Swift version like we did [5]. We should also append “-objc” to other recipes to be consistent. 4. Differentiate Swift vs Objective-C libs How to differenctiate Swift code. Specially for aerogear-ios-push which will be declined in 2 versions? One suggestion from Matthias was to have 2 separate branches. master -> objc-c until iOS8 is released and stable. I’m +1 with that idea. Agreed with that for now Let me know if you have suggestions/objections. When we reach an agreement, I’ll create associated JIRA. ++ Corinne [1] http://oksoclap.com/p/aerogear_ios_meeting_01072014 [2] http://transcripts.jboss.org/meeting/irc.freenode.org/aerogear/2014/aerog... [3] https://github.com/corinnekrych/aerogear-ios-http [4] https://github.com/corinnekrych/Weather [5] https://github.com/aerogear/aerogear-push-helloworld/tree/master/ios-swift _______________________________________________ aerogear-dev mailing list aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev

On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 11:20 PM, Corinne Krych <corinnekrych(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: Hello Guys, Last Tuesday during our (favourite) iOS meeting [1] [2] we talked about modularization. We agreed with Android team modularization is scheduled for 2.0. For iOS we have several actions: 1. rename existing repos (too bad we don’t follow well Android convention) • aerogear-ios-crypto • aerogear-ios-push (thanks passos for the suggestion) • aerogear-ios-otp • aerogear-ios-xcode-template • aerogear-ios-cookbook Since we’re talking about renaming, what about dropping “arerogear” for the repo name? +1 makes sense

all those repos belong to aerogear organization anyway. Maybe removing the aerogear part will stress more the small libraries aspect. Maybe sth we already discussed but can’t remember/find it. wdyt? 2. Pipe and Store deprecated. All aerogear-ios we’ll stick to 1.7 version and will be marked deprecated. But …. don’t be scared new modules will replace them: • aerogear-ios-http : Lightweight lib around NSURLSession to ease HTTP calls with pluggable request and response Serializers. Very very Draft version [3] with some cookbook recipe [4]. With this module we will work directly with NSURLSession (iOS foundation networking) instead of using AFNetworking. Sure Andrea will like it: no dependency :) • aerogear-ios-oauth2 : dependent on aerogear-ios-http, bring all the good stuff like AccountManager, OAuth2 extensible adapters, fluid http post/get ... • aerogear-ios-storage usage of incrementalStorage to plug into Core Data +1 all of that sounds awesome! Those modules will be written in Swift code. We’ll test them both in iOS7 and iOS8. +1 on Swift! 3. Cookbook recipes rpo • tag our repo 1.7: we didn’t have a tag strategy for cookbook demos but with the move from 1.X to 2.) I think we should * Swift demo naming convention add “-swift” for Swift version like we did [5]. We should also append “-objc” to other recipes to be consistent. yeah 4. Differentiate Swift vs Objective-C libs How to differenctiate Swift code. Specially for aerogear-ios-push which will be declined in 2 versions? One suggestion from Matthias was to have 2 separate branches. master -> objc-c until iOS8 is released and stable. I’m +1 with that idea. yeah, let's have ObjC on master now; The master can, later this year, contain the Swift lib, and we move ObjC to be deprecated as soon as we do have iOS8 (~September) Let me know if you have suggestions/objections. When we reach an agreement, I’ll create associated JIRA. ++ Corinne [1] http://oksoclap.com/p/aerogear_ios_meeting_01072014 [2] http://transcripts.jboss.org/meeting/irc.freenode.org/aerogear/2014/aerog... [3] https://github.com/corinnekrych/aerogear-ios-http [4] https://github.com/corinnekrych/Weather [5] https://github.com/aerogear/aerogear-push-helloworld/tree/master/ios-swift _______________________________________________ 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

On 25 Jul 2014, at 09:13, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew(a)apache.org&gt; wrote: > > > > On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 11:20 PM, Corinne Krych <corinnekrych(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: > Hello Guys, > > Last Tuesday during our (favourite) iOS meeting [1] [2] we talked about modularization. We agreed with Android team modularization is scheduled for 2.0. > > For iOS we have several actions: > > 1. rename existing repos (too bad we don’t follow well Android convention) > • aerogear-ios-crypto > • aerogear-ios-push (thanks passos for the suggestion) > • aerogear-ios-otp > • aerogear-ios-xcode-template > • aerogear-ios-cookbook > > Since we’re talking about renaming, what about dropping “arerogear” for the repo name? > > +1 makes sense It looks like we don’t have the same view here. Obviously if we go renaming we will have to change all the repos. With or without, coonsistency is key. My main motivation for dropping aerogear prefex was that ag is already present in the name of the organisation. Besides as we go with fine grained modularisation, our libs can be used independently, the naming without prefix is to enforce that. @passos and all others guys not in favor for dropping prefix, may I ask why?

> > all those repos belong to aerogear organization anyway. Maybe removing the aerogear part will stress more the small libraries aspect. Maybe sth we already discussed but can’t remember/find it. wdyt? > > 2. Pipe and Store deprecated. All aerogear-ios we’ll stick to 1.7 version and will be marked deprecated. > But …. don’t be scared new modules will replace them: > > • aerogear-ios-http : Lightweight lib around NSURLSession to ease HTTP calls with pluggable request and response Serializers. Very very Draft version [3] with some cookbook recipe [4]. With this module we will work directly with NSURLSession (iOS foundation networking) instead of using AFNetworking. Sure Andrea will like it: no dependency :) > • aerogear-ios-oauth2 : dependent on aerogear-ios-http, bring all the good stuff like AccountManager, OAuth2 extensible adapters, fluid http post/get ... > • aerogear-ios-storage usage of incrementalStorage to plug into Core Data > > > +1 all of that sounds awesome! > > > Those modules will be written in Swift code. We’ll test them both in iOS7 and iOS8. > > +1 on Swift! > > > 3. Cookbook recipes rpo > • tag our repo 1.7: we didn’t have a tag strategy for cookbook demos but with the move from 1.X to 2.) I think we should > * Swift demo naming convention add “-swift” for Swift version like we did [5]. We should also append “-objc” to other recipes to be consistent. > > yeah > > > 4. Differentiate Swift vs Objective-C libs > How to differenctiate Swift code. Specially for aerogear-ios-push which will be declined in 2 versions? One suggestion from Matthias was to have 2 separate branches. > master -> objc-c > until iOS8 is released and stable. > I’m +1 with that idea. > > yeah, let's have ObjC on master now; > The master can, later this year, contain the Swift lib, and we move ObjC to be deprecated as soon as we do have iOS8 (~September) > > > Let me know if you have suggestions/objections. When we reach an agreement, I’ll create associated JIRA. > > ++ > Corinne > > [1] http://oksoclap.com/p/aerogear_ios_meeting_01072014 > [2] http://transcripts.jboss.org/meeting/irc.freenode.org/aerogear/2014/aerog... > [3] https://github.com/corinnekrych/aerogear-ios-http > [4] https://github.com/corinnekrych/Weather > [5] https://github.com/aerogear/aerogear-push-helloworld/tree/master/ios-swift > _______________________________________________ > 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

On 25 Jul 2014, at 09:46, Sebastien Blanc <scm.blanc(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: > > > > On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 9:37 AM, Corinne Krych <corinnekrych(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: > > On 25 Jul 2014, at 09:13, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew(a)apache.org&gt; wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 11:20 PM, Corinne Krych < corinnekrych(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: > > Hello Guys, > > > > Last Tuesday during our (favourite) iOS meeting [1] [2] we talked about modularization. We agreed with Android team modularization is scheduled for 2.0. > > > > For iOS we have several actions: > > > > 1. rename existing repos (too bad we don’t follow well Android convention) > > • aerogear-ios-crypto > > • aerogear-ios-push (thanks passos for the suggestion) > > • aerogear-ios-otp > > • aerogear-ios-xcode-template > > • aerogear-ios-cookbook > > > > Since we’re talking about renaming, what about dropping “arerogear” for the repo name? > > > > +1 makes sense > > > It looks like we don’t have the same view here. Obviously if we go renaming we will have to change all the repos. With or without, coonsistency is key. > > My main motivation for dropping aerogear prefex was that ag is already present in the name of the organisation. Besides as we go with fine grained modularisation, our libs can be used independently, the naming without prefix is to enforce that. > > @passos and all others guys not in favor for dropping prefix, may I ask why? > > If we put GH and organization appart, will the name "AeroGear" appears anywhere in the lib name/pod when someone install it through cocoapods ? > Yeap we’ll keep aerogear as a prefix for cocoapods https://github.com/aerogear/aerogear-otp-ios/blob/master/AeroGear-OTP.pod... Good question: What about the other modules?

> > > > > > all those repos belong to aerogear organization anyway. Maybe removing the aerogear part will stress more the small libraries aspect. Maybe sth we already discussed but can’t remember/find it. wdyt? > > > > 2. Pipe and Store deprecated. All aerogear-ios we’ll stick to 1.7 version and will be marked deprecated. > > But …. don’t be scared new modules will replace them: > > > > • aerogear-ios-http : Lightweight lib around NSURLSession to ease HTTP calls with pluggable request and response Serializers. Very very Draft version [3] with some cookbook recipe [4]. With this module we will work directly with NSURLSession (iOS foundation networking) instead of using AFNetworking. Sure Andrea will like it: no dependency :) > > • aerogear-ios-oauth2 : dependent on aerogear-ios-http, bring all the good stuff like AccountManager, OAuth2 extensible adapters, fluid http post/get ... > > • aerogear-ios-storage usage of incrementalStorage to plug into Core Data > > > > > > +1 all of that sounds awesome! > > > > > > Those modules will be written in Swift code. We’ll test them both in iOS7 and iOS8. > > > > +1 on Swift! > > > > > > 3. Cookbook recipes rpo > > • tag our repo 1.7: we didn’t have a tag strategy for cookbook demos but with the move from 1.X to 2.) I think we should > > * Swift demo naming convention add “-swift” for Swift version like we did [5]. We should also append “-objc” to other recipes to be consistent. > > > > yeah > > > > > > 4. Differentiate Swift vs Objective-C libs > > How to differenctiate Swift code. Specially for aerogear-ios-push which will be declined in 2 versions? One suggestion from Matthias was to have 2 separate branches. > > master -> objc-c > > until iOS8 is released and stable. > > I’m +1 with that idea. > > > > yeah, let's have ObjC on master now; > > The master can, later this year, contain the Swift lib, and we move ObjC to be deprecated as soon as we do have iOS8 (~September) > > > > > > Let me know if you have suggestions/objections. When we reach an agreement, I’ll create associated JIRA. > > > > ++ > > Corinne > > > > [1] http://oksoclap.com/p/aerogear_ios_meeting_01072014 > > [2] http://transcripts.jboss.org/meeting/irc.freenode.org/aerogear/2014/aerog... > > [3] https://github.com/corinnekrych/aerogear-ios-http > > [4] https://github.com/corinnekrych/Weather > > [5] https://github.com/aerogear/aerogear-push-helloworld/tree/master/ios-swift > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 _______________________________________________ aerogear-dev mailing list aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev

Hi Corinne, I'm not against removing the prefix, but to keep the consistency, if the remove is called potatos-iOS, it must have the same name on Cocoapods. We discussed this during the F2F about getting rid of the prefix, but I'm not sure what has changed now to other team members. Regarding the argument of keeping it organized, that's not valid to me, is always possible to create a folder with all the projects inside. But if most of the team disagree, seems like our suggestion during the meeting is not valid anymore.

On 2014-07-25, Corinne Krych wrote: > > On 25 Jul 2014, at 09:46, Sebastien Blanc <scm.blanc(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 9:37 AM, Corinne Krych <corinnekrych(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: > > > > On 25 Jul 2014, at 09:13, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew(a)apache.org&gt; wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 11:20 PM, Corinne Krych < corinnekrych(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: > > > Hello Guys, > > > > > > Last Tuesday during our (favourite) iOS meeting [1] [2] we talked about modularization. We agreed with Android team modularization is scheduled for 2.0. > > > > > > For iOS we have several actions: > > > > > > 1. rename existing repos (too bad we don’t follow well Android convention) > > > • aerogear-ios-crypto > > > • aerogear-ios-push (thanks passos for the suggestion) > > > • aerogear-ios-otp > > > • aerogear-ios-xcode-template > > > • aerogear-ios-cookbook > > > > > > Since we’re talking about renaming, what about dropping “arerogear” for the repo name? > > > > > > +1 makes sense > > > > > > It looks like we don’t have the same view here. Obviously if we go renaming we will have to change all the repos. With or without, coonsistency is key. > > > > My main motivation for dropping aerogear prefex was that ag is already present in the name of the organisation. Besides as we go with fine grained modularisation, our libs can be used independently, the naming without prefix is to enforce that. > > > > @passos and all others guys not in favor for dropping prefix, may I ask why? > > > > If we put GH and organization appart, will the name "AeroGear" appears anywhere in the lib name/pod when someone install it through cocoapods ? > > > > Yeap we’ll keep aerogear as a prefix for cocoapods > https://github.com/aerogear/aerogear-otp-ios/blob/master/AeroGear-OTP.pod... > > Good question: What about the other modules? > > > > > > > > > > > all those repos belong to aerogear organization anyway. Maybe removing the aerogear part will stress more the small libraries aspect. Maybe sth we already discussed but can’t remember/find it. wdyt? > > > > > > 2. Pipe and Store deprecated. All aerogear-ios we’ll stick to 1.7 version and will be marked deprecated. > > > But …. don’t be scared new modules will replace them: > > > > > > • aerogear-ios-http : Lightweight lib around NSURLSession to ease HTTP calls with pluggable request and response Serializers. Very very Draft version [3] with some cookbook recipe [4]. With this module we will work directly with NSURLSession (iOS foundation networking) instead of using AFNetworking. Sure Andrea will like it: no dependency :) > > > • aerogear-ios-oauth2 : dependent on aerogear-ios-http, bring all the good stuff like AccountManager, OAuth2 extensible adapters, fluid http post/get ... > > > • aerogear-ios-storage usage of incrementalStorage to plug into Core Data > > > > > > > > > +1 all of that sounds awesome! > > > > > > > > > Those modules will be written in Swift code. We’ll test them both in iOS7 and iOS8. > > > > > > +1 on Swift! > > > > > > > > > 3. Cookbook recipes rpo > > > • tag our repo 1.7: we didn’t have a tag strategy for cookbook demos but with the move from 1.X to 2.) I think we should > > > * Swift demo naming convention add “-swift” for Swift version like we did [5]. We should also append “-objc” to other recipes to be consistent. > > > > > > yeah > > > > > > > > > 4. Differentiate Swift vs Objective-C libs > > > How to differenctiate Swift code. Specially for aerogear-ios-push which will be declined in 2 versions? One suggestion from Matthias was to have 2 separate branches. > > > master -> objc-c > > > until iOS8 is released and stable. > > > I’m +1 with that idea. > > > > > > yeah, let's have ObjC on master now; > > > The master can, later this year, contain the Swift lib, and we move ObjC to be deprecated as soon as we do have iOS8 (~September) > > > > > > > > > Let me know if you have suggestions/objections. When we reach an agreement, I’ll create associated JIRA. > > > > > > ++ > > > Corinne > > > > > > [1] http://oksoclap.com/p/aerogear_ios_meeting_01072014 > > > [2] http://transcripts.jboss.org/meeting/irc.freenode.org/aerogear/2014/aerog... > > > [3] https://github.com/corinnekrych/aerogear-ios-http > > > [4] https://github.com/corinnekrych/Weather > > > [5] https://github.com/aerogear/aerogear-push-helloworld/tree/master/ios-swift > > > _______________________________________________ > > > 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 > > > _______________________________________________ > aerogear-dev mailing list > aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev -- abstractj PGP: 0x84DC9914 _______________________________________________ aerogear-dev mailing list aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev

Hi, the "aerogear-push-ios-registration" repo has been renamed to "aerogear-ios-push" https://github.com/aerogear/aerogear-ios-push https://issues.jboss.org/browse/AGIOS-241

-Matthias On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 4:22 PM, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew(a)apache.org&gt; wrote: On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 4:11 PM, Bruno Oliveira <bruno(a)abstractj.org&gt; wrote: Hi Corinne, I'm not against removing the prefix, but to keep the consistency, if the remove is called potatos-iOS, it must have the same name on Cocoapods. We discussed this during the F2F about getting rid of the prefix, but I'm not sure what has changed now to other team members. Regarding the argument of keeping it organized, that's not valid to me, is always possible to create a folder with all the projects inside. But if most of the team disagree, seems like our suggestion during the meeting is not valid anymore. * gh/ag/ag-foo -> feels redundant, so gh/ag/foo does make sense, yeah ** forks... there is still the "forked from gh/ag/foo" * on java, we have APIs and JAR names, I'd think the aerogear name is still visible there. the jar for "gh/ag/foo", could still be named aearogear-foo-1.0.0 (including the o.j.a packages) * On JS we have namesspaces on the API (e.g. AG.Notifier) - on iOS we have classes (AGBlah) And I now recall Bruno's original point: making it more interesting to others, hence droppoing the name. Even if the get rid of the ag-foo, and name if "foo", its fineprint does not take away the aerogear brand. -Matthias On 2014-07-25, Corinne Krych wrote: > > On 25 Jul 2014, at 09:46, Sebastien Blanc <scm.blanc(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 9:37 AM, Corinne Krych <corinnekrych(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: > > > > On 25 Jul 2014, at 09:13, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew(a)apache.org&gt; wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 11:20 PM, Corinne Krych <corinnekrych(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: > > > Hello Guys, > > > > > > Last Tuesday during our (favourite) iOS meeting [1] [2] we talked about modularization. We agreed with Android team modularization is scheduled for 2.0. > > > > > > For iOS we have several actions: > > > > > > 1. rename existing repos (too bad we don’t follow well Android convention) > > > • aerogear-ios-crypto > > > • aerogear-ios-push (thanks passos for the suggestion) > > > • aerogear-ios-otp > > > • aerogear-ios-xcode-template > > > • aerogear-ios-cookbook > > > > > > Since we’re talking about renaming, what about dropping “arerogear” for the repo name? > > > > > > +1 makes sense > > > > > > It looks like we don’t have the same view here. Obviously if we go renaming we will have to change all the repos. With or without, coonsistency is key. > > > > My main motivation for dropping aerogear prefex was that ag is already present in the name of the organisation. Besides as we go with fine grained modularisation, our libs can be used independently, the naming without prefix is to enforce that. > > > > @passos and all others guys not in favor for dropping prefix, may I ask why? > > > > If we put GH and organization appart, will the name "AeroGear" appears anywhere in the lib name/pod when someone install it through cocoapods ? > > > > Yeap we’ll keep aerogear as a prefix for cocoapods > https://github.com/aerogear/aerogear-otp-ios/blob/master/AeroGear-OTP.pod... > > Good question: What about the other modules? > > > > > > > > > > > all those repos belong to aerogear organization anyway. Maybe removing the aerogear part will stress more the small libraries aspect. Maybe sth we already discussed but can’t remember/find it. wdyt? > > > > > > 2. Pipe and Store deprecated. All aerogear-ios we’ll stick to 1.7 version and will be marked deprecated. > > > But …. don’t be scared new modules will replace them: > > > > > > • aerogear-ios-http : Lightweight lib around NSURLSession to ease HTTP calls with pluggable request and response Serializers. Very very Draft version [3] with some cookbook recipe [4]. With this module we will work directly with NSURLSession (iOS foundation networking) instead of using AFNetworking. Sure Andrea will like it: no dependency :) > > > • aerogear-ios-oauth2 : dependent on aerogear-ios-http, bring all the good stuff like AccountManager, OAuth2 extensible adapters, fluid http post/get ... > > > • aerogear-ios-storage usage of incrementalStorage to plug into Core Data > > > > > > > > > +1 all of that sounds awesome! > > > > > > > > > Those modules will be written in Swift code. We’ll test them both in iOS7 and iOS8. > > > > > > +1 on Swift! > > > > > > > > > 3. Cookbook recipes rpo > > > • tag our repo 1.7: we didn’t have a tag strategy for cookbook demos but with the move from 1.X to 2.) I think we should > > > * Swift demo naming convention add “-swift” for Swift version like we did [5]. We should also append “-objc” to other recipes to be consistent. > > > > > > yeah > > > > > > > > > 4. Differentiate Swift vs Objective-C libs > > > How to differenctiate Swift code. Specially for aerogear-ios-push which will be declined in 2 versions? One suggestion from Matthias was to have 2 separate branches. > > > master -> objc-c > > > until iOS8 is released and stable. > > > I’m +1 with that idea. > > > > > > yeah, let's have ObjC on master now; > > > The master can, later this year, contain the Swift lib, and we move ObjC to be deprecated as soon as we do have iOS8 (~September) > > > > > > > > > Let me know if you have suggestions/objections. When we reach an agreement, I’ll create associated JIRA. > > > > > > ++ > > > Corinne > > > > > > [1] http://oksoclap.com/p/aerogear_ios_meeting_01072014 > > > [2]http://transcripts.jboss.org/meeting/irc.freenode.org/aerogear/2014/aer... > > > [3] https://github.com/corinnekrych/aerogear-ios-http > > > [4] https://github.com/corinnekrych/Weather > > > [5] https://github.com/aerogear/aerogear-push-helloworld/tree/master/ios-swift > > > _______________________________________________ > > > 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 > > > _______________________________________________ > aerogear-dev mailing list > aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev -- abstractj PGP: 0x84DC9914 _______________________________________________ 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 -- 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

On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 11:20:08PM +0200, Corinne Krych wrote: > Since we’re talking about renaming, what about dropping “arerogear” > for the repo name? all those repos belong to aerogear organization > anyway. Maybe removing the aerogear part will stress more the small > libraries aspect. Maybe sth we already discussed but can’t > remember/find it. wdyt? -1 Rationale: the organization namespace only exists on github - when you clone the projects you'll end up with a ton of folders with loose naming - so having the prefix keeps it organized on disk + gives us a nice boost for the 'aerogear' brand.

I can say that here where I have a bazillion of opensource projects, it's nice to have all aerogear stuff properly sorted - less cognitive load for contributors. -- qmx _______________________________________________ aerogear-dev mailing list aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev