Hello peeps,

I've just released the 0.13.0 version for the sender, https://www.npmjs.com/package/unifiedpush-node-sender

The api has changed a bit, so please check out the example to see the changes. 

Also note that node version 4 or greater is required here


I will probably think about doing a 1.0.0 release soon once people have had a chance to check out the changes


On Thu, May 5, 2016 at 1:46 PM, Luke Holmquist <lholmqui@redhat.com> wrote:
for those following along at home:

https://issues.jboss.org/browse/AGPUSH-1621

On Thu, May 5, 2016 at 1:42 PM, Luke Holmquist <lholmqui@redhat.com> wrote:


On Thu, May 5, 2016 at 1:37 PM, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew@apache.org> wrote:
I think it would be good for the community to move forward and use latest technology. Node 0.12 is already very old, given the current version is 6.

How about getting promisses in, and afterwards release this as a 1.0.0 release ? 

i think this sounds like a plan, 

/me goes and creates a JIRA

On Thu, May 5, 2016 at 5:14 PM, Luke Holmquist <lholmqui@redhat.com> wrote:
Hello people,

I think i would like to move the unifiedpush-node-sender, https://github.com/aerogear/aerogear-unifiedpush-nodejs-client ,  to be Promise based.

Currently it uses callback pattern that many node.js packages use as well as emitting events.

When i first created this 3 years ago, that was sort of the standard way of doing things,  but Promises have become very popular(i know i love them :)) and have been a native feature since node 0.12.x

considering we have not yet hit a 1.0.0, we can pretty much just make this change and we will be ok.

If this is to big of a change all at once, we could always do both callbacks and Promises.  I think we did this for Datamanager in the past.

Perhaps once we fully move to promises, then we can hit a 1.0.0

My only concern is other projects that might be using the sender that are not yet on node 0.12 or above, since this is when promises became native.  I would really like to not have to include the polyfill.

i suppose those users would need to stick to the previous versions then.

anyway,  would like to hear some thoughts.


-Luke



 

_______________________________________________
Aerogear-users mailing list
Aerogear-users@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-users




--

_______________________________________________
Aerogear-users mailing list
Aerogear-users@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-users