[aerogear-dev] GSoC plan for WebPush

[Matthias Wessendorf]

On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 7:03 PM, Idel Pivnitskiy <idel.pivnitskiy at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Right, but that goes through their service. I think one of the big
>> advantages here is that with a truly open WebPush Server/Protocol/API, you
>> as a company, can run your own, inpendent push network. Having support to
>> connect to a custom WebPush server from the (standard?) JS API would be
>> nice. Makes you more independent.
>> E.g. imagine push on a private network, where not all devcies are
>> connected to the public internet ;-)
>
>
> Yes, good case!
> But I think that it will not work with Chrome now:
> https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/Push_API/Using_the_Push_API#Extra_steps_for_Chrome_support
> Hope that it will be possible with Firefox, but I need to double check it.
>

We could offer a little decorator, if the user explicitly wants a customer
server :)

We did that for simple push too:
https://github.com/aerogear/aerogear-js/blob/master/src/simplepush/aerogear.simplepush.js#L27



>
> Best regards,
> Idel Pivnitskiy
> --
> Twitter: @idelpivnitskiy <https://twitter.com/idelpivnitskiy>
> GitHub: @idelpivnitskiy <https://github.com/idelpivnitskiy>
>
> On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 7:45 PM, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew at apache.org>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 6:03 PM, Idel Pivnitskiy <
>> idel.pivnitskiy at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Does it make sense starting with more focused examples? Showing
>>>> Chrome/Firefox receiving message via the WebPush APIs from the standalone
>>>> WebPush Server ?
>>>
>>>
>>> I think that we don't need our WebPush Server for Chrome/Firefox
>>> support. Because it possible to send push messages to Chrome only
>>> through GCM, using their API-key.
>>>
>>
>> Right, but that goes through their service. I think one of the big
>> advantages here is that with a truly open WebPush Server/Protocol/API, you
>> as a company, can run your own, inpendent push network. Having support to
>> connect to a custom WebPush server from the (standard?) JS API would be
>> nice. Makes you more independent.
>>
>> E.g. imagine push on a private network, where not all devcies are
>> connected to the public internet ;-)
>>
>> Not a high priority, but IMO worth to think about this
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> I think we can also remove the SimplePush from the master branch of
>>>> UPS, while on this project, no ?
>>>
>>>
>>> Think that it could be done at the end of the summer, if there are no
>>> reasons to keep it. After or during the integration of WebPush Server to
>>> UPS. I prefer after, like it was with Doclet and Miredot.
>>>
>>
>> +1 makes sense to remove SimplePush, once WebPush is around. WebPush is
>> the successor of SimplePush in general
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>> Idel Pivnitskiy
>>> --
>>> Twitter: @idelpivnitskiy <https://twitter.com/idelpivnitskiy>
>>> GitHub: @idelpivnitskiy <https://github.com/idelpivnitskiy>
>>>
>>> On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 6:38 PM, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew at apache.org>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 5:33 PM, Idel Pivnitskiy <
>>>> idel.pivnitskiy at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>
>>>>> I've come back from the little vocation and ready for the work on my
>>>>> GSoC project.
>>>>>
>>>>> What will be our plan?
>>>>> I may work according to my proposal: the first steps will be the
>>>>> adding WebPush support for Chrome and Firefox directly to UPS (through
>>>>> Google Cloud Messaging and Mozilla Push Service).
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I like that, but
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Another way: I may begin my work from WebPush Server.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Does it make sense starting with more focused examples? Showing
>>>> Chrome/Firefox receiving message via the WebPush APIs from the standalone
>>>> WebPush Server ?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> At the end of the day, UPS is just another 'driver', triggering the
>>>> push ?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Oh, I think we can also remove the SimplePush from the master branch of
>>>> UPS, while on this project, no ?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> If we will begin from UPS, from which branch should I work? And for
>>>>> which release?
>>>>>
>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>> Idel Pivnitskiy
>>>>> --
>>>>> Twitter: @idelpivnitskiy <https://twitter.com/idelpivnitskiy>
>>>>> GitHub: @idelpivnitskiy <https://github.com/idelpivnitskiy>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> 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/20160517/ddbfc06f/attachment-0001.html