[aerogear-dev] Android keys (Re: AeroGear Push Message Format)

Tue Jun 18 10:55:12 EDT 2013

On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 4:50 PM, Summers Pittman <supittma at redhat.com>wrote:

>  On 06/18/2013 10:46 AM, Matthias Wessendorf wrote:
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 4:42 PM, Daniel Passos <daniel at passos.me> wrote:
>
>> We don't have special words on Android, but we can use the same of iOS
>> and shoot the same behaviors. wdyt?
>>
>
>  Like you did on the PR, for "alert", right ?
>
>  I personally do like that very much
>
>    So Android doesn't define any specific "keys".
>

awesome, even better.

Forget what I was asking :)

>
> Are you asking for some generic "keys" which pushee and ag-android will
> "natively" support?
>

I like what you guys did for "alert", on Android :)   That would be cool, I
think :)

https://github.com/danielpassos/aerogear-android/blob/push/src/org/jboss/aerogear/android/unifiedpush/AGPushMessageReceiver.java#L46

>
>
>
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 9:15 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew at apache.org>wrote:
>>
>>> Summers, Passos,
>>>
>>>
>>>  wondering if we should/could honor "android" specific keys as well
>>> (similar to the iOS keys that we "honor")
>>>
>>>  See:
>>>
>>> https://github.com/aerogear/aerogear.org/blob/master/docs/specs/aerogear-push-messages/index.markdown#ios-special-keys
>>>
>>>
>>>  -Matthias
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 5:36 PM, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew at apache.org>wrote:
>>>
>>>> reminder, that ID is just the primary key :-)
>>>>
>>>>  meaningful are "pushApplicationID" and "variantID"
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 3:17 PM, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew at apache.org>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Luke
>>>>>
>>>>>  once this landed, it will be "pushApplicationID" and "variantID" -
>>>>> the ID is than meaningless (at least for PushEE server).
>>>>>
>>>>>  -M
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 6:45 PM, Lucas Holmquist <lholmqui at redhat.com>wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> plus plus
>>>>>>
>>>>>>  On May 31, 2013, at 12:39 PM, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew at apache.org>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>  https://issues.jboss.org/browse/AGPUSH-86
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>  On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 6:25 PM, Luke Holmquist <lholmqui at redhat.com
>>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On May 31, 2013, at 12:24 PM, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew at apache.org>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  somehow the device needs to say: "I belong to android variant"
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  besides the @Id /PK, we can have a second field / column that
>>>>>>> represents:
>>>>>>> * PushAppID
>>>>>>> * VariantID
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>   Yup. Having these would solve that
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  Was that your question?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Friday, May 31, 2013, Lucas Holmquist wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> something that i was thinking about after doing some examples is
>>>>>>>> that i'm not sure how i feel about using the PK's of each table as the
>>>>>>>> identifier to register/broadcast clients.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  We are sort of giving meaning to data that really shouldn't have
>>>>>>>> meaning.  it should really only be used to identify the row.  It might be
>>>>>>>> better to have another key on each table/object that is the identifier.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  So in one of the examples i did,  the app on the device will
>>>>>>>> register the device with the push server,  but i needed to also include the
>>>>>>>> id of the variant instance
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  i guess i'm thinking if someone migrates their database,  these
>>>>>>>> keys could get messed up.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  wdyt?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  On May 28, 2013, at 2:53 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <
>>>>>>>> matzew at apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 8:51 AM, Corinne Krych <
>>>>>>>> corinnekrych at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> in selective push is:
>>>>>>>> ==> variant: iOS  + alias: mwessendorf
>>>>>>>>  a valid criteria too?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  yes. let me update the related doc(s)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 28 May 2013 08:51, Corinne Krych <corinnekrych at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  On 28 May 2013 08:48, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew at apache.org>wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> TYPO:
>>>>>>>> ==> variant: iOS (since a PushAPP _might_ have only one
>>>>>>>> iOS variant) + deviceType:iPadMini  + alias: mwessendorf
>>>>>>>>  or
>>>>>>>> ==> variant: iOS (since a PushAPP _might_ have only one iOS variant)
>>>>>>>> + deviceType:iPhone  + alias: mwessendorf
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 8:43 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <
>>>>>>>> matzew at apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 12:00 AM, Corinne Krych <
>>>>>>>> corinnekrych at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> When doing selective push query, is there any overlap between
>>>>>>>> mobile variant (which I understand like mobile type which contains
>>>>>>>> certificates) and device type?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  MobileVariant (or call it type) is something like "Android", or
>>>>>>>> "iOS".
>>>>>>>> deviceTypes would be iPad, iPod, iPhone, iWatch :)  - or "Android
>>>>>>>> Table", "Andrpid phone", android what not
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  Sure.... ideally there are several variants:
>>>>>>>>  - iOS iPhone 5 optimised app in the app store
>>>>>>>>  - iOS iPhone 4s optimised app in the app store
>>>>>>>>  - iOS iPhone 3 optimised app in the app store
>>>>>>>> - iOS iPad mini optimised app in the app store
>>>>>>>> etc :)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  But, if there is only one variant, it's totally valid to install
>>>>>>>> an iOS application (from the appstore), on an iPad and an iPhone;
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  Both aimed at defining categories.
>>>>>>>>  Are those categories defined and fixed in the spec or can they be
>>>>>>>> extended?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  I don't understand categories, here
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Can we do a selective push based on mobileType=mobile variant and
>>>>>>>> alias=john at gmail?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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 listaerogear-dev at lists.jboss.orghttps://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/20130618/31e3f538/attachment-0001.html 