[aerogear-dev] Quickstarts revamp..or not...

[Daniel Bevenius]

>Today at our quickstarts, it doesn't make sense the server[1] without an
>interface[2] (I guess).
It might make sense if a user is only interested in testing the one of the
mobile clients but they can just ignore the webapp in that case..

 >I was just wondering if we could merge both in a single project. Or
>maybe make the webapp have the server as dependency, not sure.
I guess we can do that. The only reason I can think of for having them
separated was to make the proxy quickstart a little nicer, where we could
have the backend, the webapp, and the proxy all on different machines.

So I think I'm +1 on this :)







On 15 August 2014 10:01, Bruno Oliveira <bruno at abstractj.org> wrote:

> Good morning,
>
> Today at our quickstarts, it doesn't make sense the server[1] without an
> interface[2] (I guess).
>
> I was just wondering if we could merge both in a single project. Or
> maybe make the webapp have the server as dependency, not sure.
>
> Btw the name "client" for the webapp is a little bit odd to me, once it
> requires a server.
>
>
> [1] -
>
> https://github.com/aerogear/aerogear-push-quickstarts/tree/master/server/contacts-mobile-picketlink-secured
>
> [2] -
>
> https://github.com/aerogear/aerogear-push-quickstarts/tree/master/client/contacts-mobile-webapp
>
> --
>
> abstractj
> PGP: 0x84DC9914
> _______________________________________________
> aerogear-dev mailing list
> aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/aerogear-dev/attachments/20140815/44ddbe82/attachment.html