[aerogear-dev] [Unified Push] Java Sender API

Matthias Wessendorf matzew at apache.org
Tue Jun 11 08:21:03 EDT 2013 

+1


On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 2:18 PM, Sebastien Blanc <scm.blanc at gmail.com>wrote:

> Okay now that we agreed that the client should report in case of failure,
> I would like to submit a PR for that, throwing a exception is what we want
> here no ? Custom exception JavaSenderException of smt similar ?
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 10:24 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew at apache.org>wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 10:20 AM, Sebastien Blanc <scm.blanc at gmail.com>wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 10:16 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew at apache.org
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 10:04 AM, Sebastien Blanc <scm.blanc at gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 9:53 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <
>>>>> matzew at apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 9:25 AM, Sebastien Blanc <scm.blanc at gmail.com
>>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>> I start looking at the repo. I have some general questions and then
>>>>>>> more (not that much implementation detailed ;) ) specific  proposals
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> *  Is our final goal to propose an implementation that we really
>>>>>>> want the developers to use or is it more providing a reference
>>>>>>> implementation of the sender API and developer will most of the time
>>>>>>> implement their own ?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The goal is, to give them a Java Utility to use to for sending. If
>>>>>> they want, they can still do the HTTP by hand. Ideally we have this
>>>>>> "client" for other platforms as well:
>>>>>> * Node.js, Ruby, PHP etc
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> * How are we going to secure the API ?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Once the endpoints are secured, we will leverage that on the client
>>>>>> side (e.g. function to specifiy the "credentials")
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> * The API looks like now "fire & forget", do we plan to change that
>>>>>>> ?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> It is fire and forget.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I can imagine that people using the sender need to have some
>>>>>>> "feedback/return value/response" to manage their flows ?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Well, we do not really have much control there. Apple, for instance,
>>>>>> does also not really tell you: "I could not deliver the push message to Mr.
>>>>>> XYZ". Similar is google.
>>>>>> They all  have "feedback" service, that's more "here is a list of
>>>>>> invalid device tokens". This info should NEVER be returned, from our
>>>>>> Sender-Endpoint.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Other cloud providers do similar: HTTP 200 + "Thanks we got your job,
>>>>>> it is now being processed by our system"
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I agree that we don't have control between "our" systems and
>>>>> Google's/Apple's networks. But, between our push server and our backend
>>>>> server, the chance is bigger that the dev has more control.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Not nessacarially, the PushEE could be run by the "ops department", and
>>>> different groups, within one company just use it to send messages.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>  The thing is that the sender api now "swallow" the http status, just
>>>>> making the http status available for the backend app using the sender API
>>>>> will be a nice benefit (there could be no connection between our pushee and
>>>>> our backend app for instance) ...
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> If PushEE is not reachable, the client would fail, and will(should:))
>>>> report that back. This like that (low level http), we should report back.
>>>> but nothing about the actual send (the communication from PushEE ->
>>>> PushNetworks)
>>>>
>>>
>>> Okay :)  "and will(should:)) report that back" was just what I wanted to
>>> point out !
>>>
>>
>>
>>  Ah, - OK.
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>> -M
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> * You say one will go away, why is that ? Do we want to lean toward
>>>>>>> a single implementation ?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> For Java, I do not see a reason in supporting two "client". I did
>>>>>> start with AsyncHttpClient and RestEasy client. I was hoping to see
>>>>>> odds/benefits in one....
>>>>>> Looking at the code, I think I do prefer using the RestEasy inside of
>>>>>> our Java-Sender....
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  We could propose different ones (and in different language, like a
>>>>>>> vertx mod client)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> of course, but that's that's outside of the "java lib" we are talking
>>>>>> about here.  Surely, we can have a vertx-sender, node-sender etc
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So, now a bit more specific :
>>>>>>> I've been forking your repo :
>>>>>>> https://github.com/sebastienblanc/ag-java-sender/tree/refactoring
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> To factor more code and make the sender API really unit testable
>>>>>>> (running without any server) I've moved a bit things and introduced a sort
>>>>>>> of Client interface that will implement really the http client we will use,
>>>>>>> this client is then injected in the sender interface.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> that is nice. The project is simple now, and was written while I was
>>>>>> hacking the sender endpoints - that way I could avoid sending lot's of
>>>>>> CURLs ;-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> With Arquillian should be easy to add real integration tests.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> sounds good
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Let's discuss !
>>>>>>> Sebi
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 9:00 PM, Matthias Wessendorf <
>>>>>>> matzew at apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  Hello,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> a FIRST version of the Java Sender API is ready:
>>>>>>>> https://github.com/matzew/ag-java-sender
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Two implementations, based on different Java HTTP clients:
>>>>>>>> * RestEasy:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> https://github.com/matzew/ag-java-sender/blob/master/src/main/java/org/aerogear/unifiedpush/resteasy/RestEasyJavaSender.java
>>>>>>>> * AsyncHttpClient:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> https://github.com/matzew/ag-java-sender/blob/master/src/main/java/org/aerogear/unifiedpush/async/AsyncJavaSender.java
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> One will go away, time will tell... not important now...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Tests:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> https://github.com/matzew/ag-java-sender/tree/master/src/test/java/org/aerogear/unifiedpush
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> More functionality (e.g. selective send for deviceType,
>>>>>>>> MobileVariant) will follow, hand in hand with the matching endpoints
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> -Matthias
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> Matthias Wessendorf
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
>>>>>>>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
>>>>>>>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> aerogear-dev mailing list
>>>>>>>> aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org
>>>>>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> aerogear-dev mailing list
>>>>>>> aerogear-dev at 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 at lists.jboss.org
>>>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> aerogear-dev mailing list
>>>>> aerogear-dev at 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 at lists.jboss.org
>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> aerogear-dev mailing list
>>> aerogear-dev at 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 at lists.jboss.org
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> aerogear-dev mailing list
> aerogear-dev at 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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/aerogear-dev/attachments/20130611/8a9904d0/attachment.html

More information about the aerogear-dev mailing list