[aerogear-dev] News from iOS Modules front
Locked
[aerogear-dev] News from iOS Modules front
 
|
Hello Guys,
Last Tuesday during our (favourite) iOS meeting [1] [2] we talked about modularization. We agreed with Android team modularization is scheduled for 2.0. For iOS we have several actions: 1. rename existing repos (too bad we don’t follow well Android convention) • aerogear-ios-crypto • aerogear-ios-push (thanks passos for the suggestion) • aerogear-ios-otp • aerogear-ios-xcode-template • aerogear-ios-cookbook Since we’re talking about renaming, what about dropping “arerogear” for the repo name? all those repos belong to aerogear organization anyway. Maybe removing the aerogear part will stress more the small libraries aspect. Maybe sth we already discussed but can’t remember/find it. wdyt? 2. Pipe and Store deprecated. All aerogear-ios we’ll stick to 1.7 version and will be marked deprecated. But …. don’t be scared new modules will replace them: • aerogear-ios-http : Lightweight lib around NSURLSession to ease HTTP calls with pluggable request and response Serializers. Very very Draft version [3] with some cookbook recipe [4]. With this module we will work directly with NSURLSession (iOS foundation networking) instead of using AFNetworking. Sure Andrea will like it: no dependency :) • aerogear-ios-oauth2 : dependent on aerogear-ios-http, bring all the good stuff like AccountManager, OAuth2 extensible adapters, fluid http post/get ... • aerogear-ios-storage usage of incrementalStorage to plug into Core Data Those modules will be written in Swift code. We’ll test them both in iOS7 and iOS8. 3. Cookbook recipes rpo • tag our repo 1.7: we didn’t have a tag strategy for cookbook demos but with the move from 1.X to 2.) I think we should * Swift demo naming convention add “-swift” for Swift version like we did [5]. We should also append “-objc” to other recipes to be consistent. 4. Differentiate Swift vs Objective-C libs How to differenctiate Swift code. Specially for aerogear-ios-push which will be declined in 2 versions? One suggestion from Matthias was to have 2 separate branches. master -> objc-c until iOS8 is released and stable. I’m +1 with that idea. Let me know if you have suggestions/objections. When we reach an agreement, I’ll create associated JIRA. ++ Corinne [1] http://oksoclap.com/p/aerogear_ios_meeting_01072014 [2] http://transcripts.jboss.org/meeting/irc.freenode.org/aerogear/2014/aerogear.2014-07-08-11.42.txt [3] https://github.com/corinnekrych/aerogear-ios-http [4] https://github.com/corinnekrych/Weather [5] https://github.com/aerogear/aerogear-push-helloworld/tree/master/ios-swift _______________________________________________ aerogear-dev mailing list [hidden email] https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev |
Re: [aerogear-dev] News from iOS Modules front
|
|
I forgot a last topic (but not least) to end our iOS modules discussion
5. dynamic framework iOS8 Swift app using speudo objective-c fwk (static lib packaged in fwk shell) works ok Swift app using dynamic fwk packagec lib still lots of issues in xcode6beta3. We're working on it.
++ Corinne On Friday, July 11, 2014, Corinne Krych <[hidden email]> wrote: Hello Guys, _______________________________________________ aerogear-dev mailing list [hidden email] https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev |
Re: [aerogear-dev] News from iOS Modules front
|
|
In reply to this post by Corinne Krych
On 07/11/2014 05:20 PM, Corinne Krych wrote:
> Hello Guys, > > Last Tuesday during our (favourite) iOS meeting [1] [2] we talked about modularization. We agreed with Android team modularization is scheduled for 2.0. > > For iOS we have several actions: > > 1. rename existing repos (too bad we don’t follow well Android convention) > • aerogear-ios-crypto > • aerogear-ios-push (thanks passos for the suggestion) > • aerogear-ios-otp > • aerogear-ios-xcode-template > • aerogear-ios-cookbook > > Since we’re talking about renaming, what about dropping “arerogear” for the repo name? all those repos belong to aerogear organization anyway. Maybe removing the aerogear part will stress more the small libraries aspect. Maybe sth we already discussed but can’t remember/find it. wdyt? > > 2. Pipe and Store deprecated. All aerogear-ios we’ll stick to 1.7 version and will be marked deprecated. > But …. don’t be scared new modules will replace them: > > • aerogear-ios-http : Lightweight lib around NSURLSession to ease HTTP calls with pluggable request and response Serializers. Very very Draft version [3] with some cookbook recipe [4]. With this module we will work directly with NSURLSession (iOS foundation networking) instead of using AFNetworking. Sure Andrea will like it: no dependency :) > • aerogear-ios-oauth2 : dependent on aerogear-ios-http, bring all the good stuff like AccountManager, OAuth2 extensible adapters, fluid http post/get ... > • aerogear-ios-storage usage of incrementalStorage to plug into Core Data Yeah I'm not sure if Android will drop Pipe and Store, I personally use them a lot. But I understand that on other platforms they are much simpler. > > Those modules will be written in Swift code. We’ll test them both in iOS7 and iOS8. > > 3. Cookbook recipes rpo > • tag our repo 1.7: we didn’t have a tag strategy for cookbook demos but with the move from 1.X to 2.) I think we should > * Swift demo naming convention add “-swift” for Swift version like we did [5]. We should also append “-objc” to other recipes to be consistent. > > 4. Differentiate Swift vs Objective-C libs > How to differenctiate Swift code. Specially for aerogear-ios-push which will be declined in 2 versions? One suggestion from Matthias was to have 2 separate branches. > master -> objc-c > until iOS8 is released and stable. > I’m +1 with that idea. necessary if they are cross compatible, but I'm not that passionate either way. > > Let me know if you have suggestions/objections. When we reach an agreement, I’ll create associated JIRA. > > ++ > Corinne > > [1] http://oksoclap.com/p/aerogear_ios_meeting_01072014 > [2] http://transcripts.jboss.org/meeting/irc.freenode.org/aerogear/2014/aerogear.2014-07-08-11.42.txt > [3] https://github.com/corinnekrych/aerogear-ios-http > [4] https://github.com/corinnekrych/Weather > [5] https://github.com/aerogear/aerogear-push-helloworld/tree/master/ios-swift > _______________________________________________ > aerogear-dev mailing list > [hidden email] > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev -- Summers Pittman >>Phone:404 941 4698 >>Java is my crack. _______________________________________________ aerogear-dev mailing list [hidden email] https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev |
Re: [aerogear-dev] News from iOS Modules front
|
|
In reply to this post by Corinne Krych
On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 6:20 PM, Corinne Krych <[hidden email]> wrote: Hello Guys, -9001 for dropping “arerogear” for the repo name 2. Pipe and Store deprecated. All aerogear-ios we’ll stick to 1.7 version and will be marked deprecated. Very nice! Those modules will be written in Swift code. We’ll test them both in iOS7 and iOS8. Sorry but It's not clear for me. We'll not support Objective-C for that? Or will support both?
3. Cookbook recipes rpo Agreed with that for now Let me know if you have suggestions/objections. When we reach an agreement, I’ll create associated JIRA. _______________________________________________ aerogear-dev mailing list [hidden email] https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev |
|
|
Thanks for your feedback Passos,
On Jul 25, 2014, at 1:27 AM, Daniel Passos <[hidden email]> wrote:
we will _aim_ to support objc-c apps that will try to use our fwks written in Swift. Although there is some great interoperability between the two languages, there are things that need be taken into account when obj-c code accesses swift code (and vice versa) (more information can be found here [1]) Our belief, is that any _new_ fwk is about to head start today, its can be based on Swift. At the end as Apple has stated: {quote} Swift is ready to use today, in brand new apps or alongside your proven Objective-C code. We have big plans for the Swift language, including improvements to syntax, and powerful new features.” {quote} Thanks, Christos
_______________________________________________ aerogear-dev mailing list [hidden email] https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev |
Re: [aerogear-dev] News from iOS Modules front
|
|
In reply to this post by Corinne Krych
On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 11:20 PM, Corinne Krych <[hidden email]> wrote: Hello Guys, +1 makes sense all those repos belong to aerogear organization anyway. Maybe removing the aerogear part will stress more the small libraries aspect. Maybe sth we already discussed but can’t remember/find it. wdyt? +1 all of that sounds awesome!
+1 on Swift!
yeah
yeah, let's have ObjC on master now; The master can, later this year, contain the Swift lib, and we move ObjC to be deprecated as soon as we do have iOS8 (~September)
Matthias Wessendorf blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf _______________________________________________ aerogear-dev mailing list [hidden email] https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev |
Re: [aerogear-dev] News from iOS Modules front
|
|
On 25 Jul 2014, at 09:13, Matthias Wessendorf <[hidden email]> wrote: > > > > On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 11:20 PM, Corinne Krych <[hidden email]> wrote: > Hello Guys, > > Last Tuesday during our (favourite) iOS meeting [1] [2] we talked about modularization. We agreed with Android team modularization is scheduled for 2.0. > > For iOS we have several actions: > > 1. rename existing repos (too bad we don’t follow well Android convention) > • aerogear-ios-crypto > • aerogear-ios-push (thanks passos for the suggestion) > • aerogear-ios-otp > • aerogear-ios-xcode-template > • aerogear-ios-cookbook > > Since we’re talking about renaming, what about dropping “arerogear” for the repo name? > > +1 makes sense It looks like we don’t have the same view here. Obviously if we go renaming we will have to change all the repos. With or without, coonsistency is key. My main motivation for dropping aerogear prefex was that ag is already present in the name of the organisation. Besides as we go with fine grained modularisation, our libs can be used independently, the naming without prefix is to enforce that. @passos and all others guys not in favor for dropping prefix, may I ask why? > > all those repos belong to aerogear organization anyway. Maybe removing the aerogear part will stress more the small libraries aspect. Maybe sth we already discussed but can’t remember/find it. wdyt? > > 2. Pipe and Store deprecated. All aerogear-ios we’ll stick to 1.7 version and will be marked deprecated. > But …. don’t be scared new modules will replace them: > > • aerogear-ios-http : Lightweight lib around NSURLSession to ease HTTP calls with pluggable request and response Serializers. Very very Draft version [3] with some cookbook recipe [4]. With this module we will work directly with NSURLSession (iOS foundation networking) instead of using AFNetworking. Sure Andrea will like it: no dependency :) > • aerogear-ios-oauth2 : dependent on aerogear-ios-http, bring all the good stuff like AccountManager, OAuth2 extensible adapters, fluid http post/get ... > • aerogear-ios-storage usage of incrementalStorage to plug into Core Data > > > +1 all of that sounds awesome! > > > Those modules will be written in Swift code. We’ll test them both in iOS7 and iOS8. > > +1 on Swift! > > > 3. Cookbook recipes rpo > • tag our repo 1.7: we didn’t have a tag strategy for cookbook demos but with the move from 1.X to 2.) I think we should > * Swift demo naming convention add “-swift” for Swift version like we did [5]. We should also append “-objc” to other recipes to be consistent. > > yeah > > > 4. Differentiate Swift vs Objective-C libs > How to differenctiate Swift code. Specially for aerogear-ios-push which will be declined in 2 versions? One suggestion from Matthias was to have 2 separate branches. > master -> objc-c > until iOS8 is released and stable. > I’m +1 with that idea. > > yeah, let's have ObjC on master now; > The master can, later this year, contain the Swift lib, and we move ObjC to be deprecated as soon as we do have iOS8 (~September) > > > Let me know if you have suggestions/objections. When we reach an agreement, I’ll create associated JIRA. > > ++ > Corinne > > [1] http://oksoclap.com/p/aerogear_ios_meeting_01072014 > [2] http://transcripts.jboss.org/meeting/irc.freenode.org/aerogear/2014/aerogear.2014-07-08-11.42.txt > [3] https://github.com/corinnekrych/aerogear-ios-http > [4] https://github.com/corinnekrych/Weather > [5] https://github.com/aerogear/aerogear-push-helloworld/tree/master/ios-swift > _______________________________________________ > aerogear-dev mailing list > [hidden email] > 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 > [hidden email] > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev _______________________________________________ aerogear-dev mailing list [hidden email] https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev |
Re: [aerogear-dev] News from iOS Modules front
|
|
>Since we’re talking about renaming, what about dropping “arerogear” for the repo name? +1 on dropping the aerogear prefix on the repos.
On 25 July 2014 09:37, Corinne Krych <[hidden email]> wrote:
_______________________________________________ aerogear-dev mailing list [hidden email] https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev |
Re: [aerogear-dev] News from iOS Modules front
|
|
In reply to this post by Corinne Krych
On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 9:37 AM, Corinne Krych <[hidden email]> wrote:
If we put GH and organization appart, will the name "AeroGear" appears anywhere in the lib name/pod when someone install it through cocoapods ?
_______________________________________________ aerogear-dev mailing list [hidden email] https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev |
Re: [aerogear-dev] News from iOS Modules front
|
|
On 25 Jul 2014, at 09:46, Sebastien Blanc <[hidden email]> wrote: > > > > On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 9:37 AM, Corinne Krych <[hidden email]> wrote: > > On 25 Jul 2014, at 09:13, Matthias Wessendorf <[hidden email]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 11:20 PM, Corinne Krych <[hidden email]> wrote: > > Hello Guys, > > > > Last Tuesday during our (favourite) iOS meeting [1] [2] we talked about modularization. We agreed with Android team modularization is scheduled for 2.0. > > > > For iOS we have several actions: > > > > 1. rename existing repos (too bad we don’t follow well Android convention) > > • aerogear-ios-crypto > > • aerogear-ios-push (thanks passos for the suggestion) > > • aerogear-ios-otp > > • aerogear-ios-xcode-template > > • aerogear-ios-cookbook > > > > Since we’re talking about renaming, what about dropping “arerogear” for the repo name? > > > > +1 makes sense > > > It looks like we don’t have the same view here. Obviously if we go renaming we will have to change all the repos. With or without, coonsistency is key. > > My main motivation for dropping aerogear prefex was that ag is already present in the name of the organisation. Besides as we go with fine grained modularisation, our libs can be used independently, the naming without prefix is to enforce that. > > @passos and all others guys not in favor for dropping prefix, may I ask why? > > If we put GH and organization appart, will the name "AeroGear" appears anywhere in the lib name/pod when someone install it through cocoapods ? > Yeap we’ll keep aerogear as a prefix for cocoapods https://github.com/aerogear/aerogear-otp-ios/blob/master/AeroGear-OTP.podspec#L18 Good question: What about the other modules? > > > > > > all those repos belong to aerogear organization anyway. Maybe removing the aerogear part will stress more the small libraries aspect. Maybe sth we already discussed but can’t remember/find it. wdyt? > > > > 2. Pipe and Store deprecated. All aerogear-ios we’ll stick to 1.7 version and will be marked deprecated. > > But …. don’t be scared new modules will replace them: > > > > • aerogear-ios-http : Lightweight lib around NSURLSession to ease HTTP calls with pluggable request and response Serializers. Very very Draft version [3] with some cookbook recipe [4]. With this module we will work directly with NSURLSession (iOS foundation networking) instead of using AFNetworking. Sure Andrea will like it: no dependency :) > > • aerogear-ios-oauth2 : dependent on aerogear-ios-http, bring all the good stuff like AccountManager, OAuth2 extensible adapters, fluid http post/get ... > > • aerogear-ios-storage usage of incrementalStorage to plug into Core Data > > > > > > +1 all of that sounds awesome! > > > > > > Those modules will be written in Swift code. We’ll test them both in iOS7 and iOS8. > > > > +1 on Swift! > > > > > > 3. Cookbook recipes rpo > > • tag our repo 1.7: we didn’t have a tag strategy for cookbook demos but with the move from 1.X to 2.) I think we should > > * Swift demo naming convention add “-swift” for Swift version like we did [5]. We should also append “-objc” to other recipes to be consistent. > > > > yeah > > > > > > 4. Differentiate Swift vs Objective-C libs > > How to differenctiate Swift code. Specially for aerogear-ios-push which will be declined in 2 versions? One suggestion from Matthias was to have 2 separate branches. > > master -> objc-c > > until iOS8 is released and stable. > > I’m +1 with that idea. > > > > yeah, let's have ObjC on master now; > > The master can, later this year, contain the Swift lib, and we move ObjC to be deprecated as soon as we do have iOS8 (~September) > > > > > > Let me know if you have suggestions/objections. When we reach an agreement, I’ll create associated JIRA. > > > > ++ > > Corinne > > > > [1] http://oksoclap.com/p/aerogear_ios_meeting_01072014 > > [2] http://transcripts.jboss.org/meeting/irc.freenode.org/aerogear/2014/aerogear.2014-07-08-11.42.txt > > [3] https://github.com/corinnekrych/aerogear-ios-http > > [4] https://github.com/corinnekrych/Weather > > [5] https://github.com/aerogear/aerogear-push-helloworld/tree/master/ios-swift > > _______________________________________________ > > aerogear-dev mailing list > > [hidden email] > > 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 > > [hidden email] > > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev > > > _______________________________________________ > aerogear-dev mailing list > [hidden email] > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev > > _______________________________________________ > aerogear-dev mailing list > [hidden email] > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev _______________________________________________ aerogear-dev mailing list [hidden email] https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev |
Re: [aerogear-dev] News from iOS Modules front
|
|
On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 9:50 AM, Corinne Krych <[hidden email]> wrote:
hrm, yeah .... I am bit concerned there.... perhaps.... not sure, keep the aerogear ? but yeah it feels duplicated ...
Matthias Wessendorf blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf _______________________________________________ aerogear-dev mailing list [hidden email] https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev |
|
Administrator
|
In reply to this post by Corinne Krych
On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 11:20:08PM +0200, Corinne Krych wrote:
> Since we’re talking about renaming, what about dropping “arerogear” > for the repo name? all those repos belong to aerogear organization > anyway. Maybe removing the aerogear part will stress more the small > libraries aspect. Maybe sth we already discussed but can’t > remember/find it. wdyt? -1 Rationale: the organization namespace only exists on github - when you clone the projects you'll end up with a ton of folders with loose naming - so having the prefix keeps it organized on disk + gives us a nice boost for the 'aerogear' brand. I can say that here where I have a bazillion of opensource projects, it's nice to have all aerogear stuff properly sorted - less cognitive load for contributors. -- qmx _______________________________________________ aerogear-dev mailing list [hidden email] https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev |
Re: [aerogear-dev] News from iOS Modules front
|
|
On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 2:04 PM, Douglas Campos <[hidden email]> wrote:
yeah :-) ok, let's keep the 'aerogear' :-)
Matthias Wessendorf blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf _______________________________________________ aerogear-dev mailing list [hidden email] https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev |
Re: [aerogear-dev] News from iOS Modules front
|
|
In reply to this post by qmx
On 25 Jul 2014, at 14:04, Douglas Campos <[hidden email]> wrote: > On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 11:20:08PM +0200, Corinne Krych wrote: >> Since we’re talking about renaming, what about dropping “arerogear” >> for the repo name? all those repos belong to aerogear organization >> anyway. Maybe removing the aerogear part will stress more the small >> libraries aspect. Maybe sth we already discussed but can’t >> remember/find it. wdyt? > -1 > > Rationale: the organization namespace only exists on github - when you > clone the projects you'll end up with a ton of folders with loose > naming - so having the prefix keeps it organized on disk + gives us a > nice boost for the 'aerogear' brand. > > I can say that here where I have a bazillion of opensource projects, > it's nice to have all aerogear stuff properly sorted - less cognitive > load for contributors. > Oki. we stick to ag prefix. no rush on that. > -- > qmx > _______________________________________________ > aerogear-dev mailing list > [hidden email] > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev _______________________________________________ aerogear-dev mailing list [hidden email] https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev |
Re: [aerogear-dev] News from iOS Modules front
|
|
In reply to this post by Corinne Krych
Hi Corinne,
I'm not against removing the prefix, but to keep the consistency, if the remove is called potatos-iOS, it must have the same name on Cocoapods. We discussed this during the F2F about getting rid of the prefix, but I'm not sure what has changed now to other team members. Regarding the argument of keeping it organized, that's not valid to me, is always possible to create a folder with all the projects inside. But if most of the team disagree, seems like our suggestion during the meeting is not valid anymore. On 2014-07-25, Corinne Krych wrote: > > On 25 Jul 2014, at 09:46, Sebastien Blanc <[hidden email]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 9:37 AM, Corinne Krych <[hidden email]> wrote: > > > > On 25 Jul 2014, at 09:13, Matthias Wessendorf <[hidden email]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 11:20 PM, Corinne Krych <[hidden email]> wrote: > > > Hello Guys, > > > > > > Last Tuesday during our (favourite) iOS meeting [1] [2] we talked about modularization. We agreed with Android team modularization is scheduled for 2.0. > > > > > > For iOS we have several actions: > > > > > > 1. rename existing repos (too bad we don’t follow well Android convention) > > > • aerogear-ios-crypto > > > • aerogear-ios-push (thanks passos for the suggestion) > > > • aerogear-ios-otp > > > • aerogear-ios-xcode-template > > > • aerogear-ios-cookbook > > > > > > Since we’re talking about renaming, what about dropping “arerogear” for the repo name? > > > > > > +1 makes sense > > > > > > It looks like we don’t have the same view here. Obviously if we go renaming we will have to change all the repos. With or without, coonsistency is key. > > > > My main motivation for dropping aerogear prefex was that ag is already present in the name of the organisation. Besides as we go with fine grained modularisation, our libs can be used independently, the naming without prefix is to enforce that. > > > > @passos and all others guys not in favor for dropping prefix, may I ask why? > > > > If we put GH and organization appart, will the name "AeroGear" appears anywhere in the lib name/pod when someone install it through cocoapods ? > > > > Yeap we’ll keep aerogear as a prefix for cocoapods > https://github.com/aerogear/aerogear-otp-ios/blob/master/AeroGear-OTP.podspec#L18 > > Good question: What about the other modules? > > > > > > > > > > > all those repos belong to aerogear organization anyway. Maybe removing the aerogear part will stress more the small libraries aspect. Maybe sth we already discussed but can’t remember/find it. wdyt? > > > > > > 2. Pipe and Store deprecated. All aerogear-ios we’ll stick to 1.7 version and will be marked deprecated. > > > But …. don’t be scared new modules will replace them: > > > > > > • aerogear-ios-http : Lightweight lib around NSURLSession to ease HTTP calls with pluggable request and response Serializers. Very very Draft version [3] with some cookbook recipe [4]. With this module we will work directly with NSURLSession (iOS foundation networking) instead of using AFNetworking. Sure Andrea will like it: no dependency :) > > > • aerogear-ios-oauth2 : dependent on aerogear-ios-http, bring all the good stuff like AccountManager, OAuth2 extensible adapters, fluid http post/get ... > > > • aerogear-ios-storage usage of incrementalStorage to plug into Core Data > > > > > > > > > +1 all of that sounds awesome! > > > > > > > > > Those modules will be written in Swift code. We’ll test them both in iOS7 and iOS8. > > > > > > +1 on Swift! > > > > > > > > > 3. Cookbook recipes rpo > > > • tag our repo 1.7: we didn’t have a tag strategy for cookbook demos but with the move from 1.X to 2.) I think we should > > > * Swift demo naming convention add “-swift” for Swift version like we did [5]. We should also append “-objc” to other recipes to be consistent. > > > > > > yeah > > > > > > > > > 4. Differentiate Swift vs Objective-C libs > > > How to differenctiate Swift code. Specially for aerogear-ios-push which will be declined in 2 versions? One suggestion from Matthias was to have 2 separate branches. > > > master -> objc-c > > > until iOS8 is released and stable. > > > I’m +1 with that idea. > > > > > > yeah, let's have ObjC on master now; > > > The master can, later this year, contain the Swift lib, and we move ObjC to be deprecated as soon as we do have iOS8 (~September) > > > > > > > > > Let me know if you have suggestions/objections. When we reach an agreement, I’ll create associated JIRA. > > > > > > ++ > > > Corinne > > > > > > [1] http://oksoclap.com/p/aerogear_ios_meeting_01072014 > > > [2] http://transcripts.jboss.org/meeting/irc.freenode.org/aerogear/2014/aerogear.2014-07-08-11.42.txt > > > [3] https://github.com/corinnekrych/aerogear-ios-http > > > [4] https://github.com/corinnekrych/Weather > > > [5] https://github.com/aerogear/aerogear-push-helloworld/tree/master/ios-swift > > > _______________________________________________ > > > aerogear-dev mailing list > > > [hidden email] > > > 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 > > > [hidden email] > > > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > aerogear-dev mailing list > > [hidden email] > > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev > > > > _______________________________________________ > > aerogear-dev mailing list > > [hidden email] > > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev > > > _______________________________________________ > aerogear-dev mailing list > [hidden email] > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev -- abstractj PGP: 0x84DC9914 _______________________________________________ aerogear-dev mailing list [hidden email] https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev |
Re: [aerogear-dev] News from iOS Modules front
|
|
On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 4:11 PM, Bruno Oliveira <[hidden email]> wrote: Hi Corinne, * gh/ag/ag-foo -> feels redundant, so gh/ag/foo does make sense, yeah ** forks... there is still the "forked from gh/ag/foo"
* on java, we have APIs and JAR names, I'd think the aerogear name is still visible there. the jar for "gh/ag/foo", could still be named aearogear-foo-1.0.0 (including the o.j.a packages)
* On JS we have namesspaces on the API (e.g. AG.Notifier) - on iOS we have classes (AGBlah) And I now recall Bruno's original point: making it more interesting to others, hence droppoing the name.
Even if the get rid of the ag-foo, and name if "foo", its fineprint does not take away the aerogear brand. -Matthias
Matthias Wessendorf blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf _______________________________________________ aerogear-dev mailing list [hidden email] https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev |
Re: [aerogear-dev] News from iOS Modules front
|
|
Hi, the "aerogear-push-ios-registration" repo has been renamed to "aerogear-ios-push" On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 4:22 PM, Matthias Wessendorf <[hidden email]> wrote:
Matthias Wessendorf blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf _______________________________________________ aerogear-dev mailing list [hidden email] https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev |
Re: [aerogear-dev] News from iOS Modules front
|
|
On 18 Aug 2014, at 14:01, Matthias Wessendorf <[hidden email]> wrote: > Hi, > > the "aerogear-push-ios-registration" repo has been renamed to "aerogear-ios-push" > > https://github.com/aerogear/aerogear-ios-push > https://issues.jboss.org/browse/AGIOS-241 Thanks! > > -Matthias > > > > > On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 4:22 PM, Matthias Wessendorf <[hidden email]> wrote: > > > > On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 4:11 PM, Bruno Oliveira <[hidden email]> wrote: > Hi Corinne, > > I'm not against removing the prefix, but to keep the consistency, if the > remove is called potatos-iOS, it must have the same name on Cocoapods. > > We discussed this during the F2F about getting rid of the prefix, but I'm not > sure what has changed now to other team members. Regarding the argument > of keeping it organized, that's not valid to me, is always possible to create a > folder with all the projects inside. > > But if most of the team disagree, seems like our suggestion during the > meeting is not valid anymore. > > * gh/ag/ag-foo -> feels redundant, so gh/ag/foo does make sense, yeah > ** forks... there is still the "forked from gh/ag/foo" > > * on java, we have APIs and JAR names, I'd think the aerogear name is still visible there. > the jar for "gh/ag/foo", could still be named aearogear-foo-1.0.0 (including the o.j.a packages) > * On JS we have namesspaces on the API (e.g. AG.Notifier) - on iOS we have classes (AGBlah) > > And I now recall Bruno's original point: making it more interesting to others, hence droppoing the name. > Even if the get rid of the ag-foo, and name if "foo", its fineprint does not take away the aerogear brand. > > -Matthias > > > > On 2014-07-25, Corinne Krych wrote: > > > > On 25 Jul 2014, at 09:46, Sebastien Blanc <[hidden email]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 9:37 AM, Corinne Krych <[hidden email]> wrote: > > > > > > On 25 Jul 2014, at 09:13, Matthias Wessendorf <[hidden email]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 11:20 PM, Corinne Krych <[hidden email]> wrote: > > > > Hello Guys, > > > > > > > > Last Tuesday during our (favourite) iOS meeting [1] [2] we talked about modularization. We agreed with Android team modularization is scheduled for 2.0. > > > > > > > > For iOS we have several actions: > > > > > > > > 1. rename existing repos (too bad we don’t follow well Android convention) > > > > • aerogear-ios-crypto > > > > • aerogear-ios-push (thanks passos for the suggestion) > > > > • aerogear-ios-otp > > > > • aerogear-ios-xcode-template > > > > • aerogear-ios-cookbook > > > > > > > > Since we’re talking about renaming, what about dropping “arerogear” for the repo name? > > > > > > > > +1 makes sense > > > > > > > > > It looks like we don’t have the same view here. Obviously if we go renaming we will have to change all the repos. With or without, coonsistency is key. > > > > > > My main motivation for dropping aerogear prefex was that ag is already present in the name of the organisation. Besides as we go with fine grained modularisation, our libs can be used independently, the naming without prefix is to enforce that. > > > > > > @passos and all others guys not in favor for dropping prefix, may I ask why? > > > > > > If we put GH and organization appart, will the name "AeroGear" appears anywhere in the lib name/pod when someone install it through cocoapods ? > > > > > > > Yeap we’ll keep aerogear as a prefix for cocoapods > > https://github.com/aerogear/aerogear-otp-ios/blob/master/AeroGear-OTP.podspec#L18 > > > > Good question: What about the other modules? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > all those repos belong to aerogear organization anyway. Maybe removing the aerogear part will stress more the small libraries aspect. Maybe sth we already discussed but can’t remember/find it. wdyt? > > > > > > > > 2. Pipe and Store deprecated. All aerogear-ios we’ll stick to 1.7 version and will be marked deprecated. > > > > But …. don’t be scared new modules will replace them: > > > > > > > > • aerogear-ios-http : Lightweight lib around NSURLSession to ease HTTP calls with pluggable request and response Serializers. Very very Draft version [3] with some cookbook recipe [4]. With this module we will work directly with NSURLSession (iOS foundation networking) instead of using AFNetworking. Sure Andrea will like it: no dependency :) > > > > • aerogear-ios-oauth2 : dependent on aerogear-ios-http, bring all the good stuff like AccountManager, OAuth2 extensible adapters, fluid http post/get ... > > > > • aerogear-ios-storage usage of incrementalStorage to plug into Core Data > > > > > > > > > > > > +1 all of that sounds awesome! > > > > > > > > > > > > Those modules will be written in Swift code. We’ll test them both in iOS7 and iOS8. > > > > > > > > +1 on Swift! > > > > > > > > > > > > 3. Cookbook recipes rpo > > > > • tag our repo 1.7: we didn’t have a tag strategy for cookbook demos but with the move from 1.X to 2.) I think we should > > > > * Swift demo naming convention add “-swift” for Swift version like we did [5]. We should also append “-objc” to other recipes to be consistent. > > > > > > > > yeah > > > > > > > > > > > > 4. Differentiate Swift vs Objective-C libs > > > > How to differenctiate Swift code. Specially for aerogear-ios-push which will be declined in 2 versions? One suggestion from Matthias was to have 2 separate branches. > > > > master -> objc-c > > > > until iOS8 is released and stable. > > > > I’m +1 with that idea. > > > > > > > > yeah, let's have ObjC on master now; > > > > The master can, later this year, contain the Swift lib, and we move ObjC to be deprecated as soon as we do have iOS8 (~September) > > > > > > > > > > > > Let me know if you have suggestions/objections. When we reach an agreement, I’ll create associated JIRA. > > > > > > > > ++ > > > > Corinne > > > > > > > > [1] http://oksoclap.com/p/aerogear_ios_meeting_01072014 > > > > [2]http://transcripts.jboss.org/meeting/irc.freenode.org/aerogear/2014/aerogear.2014-07-08-11.42.txt > > > > [3] https://github.com/corinnekrych/aerogear-ios-http > > > > [4] https://github.com/corinnekrych/Weather > > > > [5] https://github.com/aerogear/aerogear-push-helloworld/tree/master/ios-swift > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > aerogear-dev mailing list > > > > [hidden email] > > > > 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 > > > > [hidden email] > > > > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > aerogear-dev mailing list > > > [hidden email] > > > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > aerogear-dev mailing list > > > [hidden email] > > > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > aerogear-dev mailing list > > [hidden email] > > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev > > -- > > abstractj > PGP: 0x84DC9914 > _______________________________________________ > aerogear-dev mailing list > [hidden email] > 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 > > > > -- > Matthias Wessendorf > > blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ > sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf > twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf > _______________________________________________ > aerogear-dev mailing list > [hidden email] > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev _______________________________________________ aerogear-dev mailing list [hidden email] https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev |
«
Return to aerogear-dev
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |