[aerogear-dev] Sync Day 4 Sync or Swim

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
17 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[aerogear-dev] Sync Day 4 Sync or Swim

Summers Pittman
So This should be all of the JIRAs (epics plus sub tasks)

  *
https://issues.jboss.org/browse/AEROGEAR-1428?jql=project%20%3D%20AEROGEAR%20AND%20component%20%3D%20data-sync%20AND%20created%20%3E%3D%20-1w%20ORDER%20BY%20created%20DESC

Now we need to figure out things like versions, release dates, project
specific JIRAs, etc.

Me PERSONALLY I think that
  * https://issues.jboss.org/browse/AEROGEAR-1405 and
  * https://issues.jboss.org/browse/AEROGEAR-1409

leave us in a great place for a 0.1.0 release.  It will have enough
stuff done that we can say "yes this a product" but isn't so feature
rich that we get bogged down in minutia.

WDYT?
_______________________________________________
aerogear-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [aerogear-dev] Sync Day 4 Sync or Swim

Luke Holmquist

On Feb 3, 2014, at 9:27 AM, Summers Pittman <[hidden email]> wrote:

> So This should be all of the JIRAs (epics plus sub tasks)
>
>  *
> https://issues.jboss.org/browse/AEROGEAR-1428?jql=project%20%3D%20AEROGEAR%20AND%20component%20%3D%20data-sync%20AND%20created%20%3E%3D%20-1w%20ORDER%20BY%20created%20DESC
>
> Now we need to figure out things like versions, release dates, project
> specific JIRAs, etc.
>
> Me PERSONALLY I think that
>  * https://issues.jboss.org/browse/AEROGEAR-1405 and
>  * https://issues.jboss.org/browse/AEROGEAR-1409
>
those look pretty good and i think we have some of POC'd already



> leave us in a great place for a 0.1.0 release.  It will have enough
> stuff done that we can say "yes this a product" but isn't so feature
> rich that we get bogged down in minutia.
>
> WDYT?
> _______________________________________________
> 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
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [aerogear-dev] Sync Day 4 Sync or Swim

danielbevenius
Just catching up on all this, but I think this looks good.


On 3 February 2014 15:33, Lucas Holmquist <[hidden email]> wrote:

On Feb 3, 2014, at 9:27 AM, Summers Pittman <[hidden email]> wrote:

> So This should be all of the JIRAs (epics plus sub tasks)
>
>  *
> https://issues.jboss.org/browse/AEROGEAR-1428?jql=project%20%3D%20AEROGEAR%20AND%20component%20%3D%20data-sync%20AND%20created%20%3E%3D%20-1w%20ORDER%20BY%20created%20DESC
>
> Now we need to figure out things like versions, release dates, project
> specific JIRAs, etc.
>
> Me PERSONALLY I think that
>  * https://issues.jboss.org/browse/AEROGEAR-1405 and
>  * https://issues.jboss.org/browse/AEROGEAR-1409
>
those look pretty good and i think we have some of POC'd already



> leave us in a great place for a 0.1.0 release.  It will have enough
> stuff done that we can say "yes this a product" but isn't so feature
> rich that we get bogged down in minutia.
>
> WDYT?
> _______________________________________________
> 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
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [aerogear-dev] Sync Day 4 Sync or Swim

Summers Pittman
On Mon 03 Feb 2014 09:41:25 AM EST, Daniel Bevenius wrote:
> Just catching up on all this, but I think this looks good.

One quick note, I did not pay THAT much attention to what the server
needs to have.

I think it may be "good enough" for a 0.1.0 to have the protocol
defined and the server be just an RI instead of a full product for a
bit.

>
>
> On 3 February 2014 15:33, Lucas Holmquist <[hidden email]
> <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
>
>
>     On Feb 3, 2014, at 9:27 AM, Summers Pittman <[hidden email]
>     <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
>
>     > So This should be all of the JIRAs (epics plus sub tasks)
>     >
>     >  *
>     >
>     https://issues.jboss.org/browse/AEROGEAR-1428?jql=project%20%3D%20AEROGEAR%20AND%20component%20%3D%20data-sync%20AND%20created%20%3E%3D%20-1w%20ORDER%20BY%20created%20DESC
>     >
>     > Now we need to figure out things like versions, release dates,
>     project
>     > specific JIRAs, etc.
>     >
>     > Me PERSONALLY I think that
>     >  * https://issues.jboss.org/browse/AEROGEAR-1405 and
>     >  * https://issues.jboss.org/browse/AEROGEAR-1409
>     >
>     those look pretty good and i think we have some of POC'd already
>
>
>
>     > leave us in a great place for a 0.1.0 release.  It will have enough
>     > stuff done that we can say "yes this a product" but isn't so feature
>     > rich that we get bogged down in minutia.
>     >
>     > WDYT?
>     > _______________________________________________
>     > aerogear-dev mailing list
>     > [hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>
>     > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
>
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     aerogear-dev mailing list
>     [hidden email] <mailto:[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
qmx
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [aerogear-dev] Sync Day 4 Sync or Swim

qmx
Administrator
Could we stop even mentioning "product"? :)

--
qmx
_______________________________________________
aerogear-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [aerogear-dev] Sync Day 4 Sync or Swim

Corinne Krych
In reply to this post by Summers Pittman

On 03 Feb 2014, at 15:44, Summers Pittman <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Mon 03 Feb 2014 09:41:25 AM EST, Daniel Bevenius wrote:
>> Just catching up on all this, but I think this looks good.
>
> One quick note, I did not pay THAT much attention to what the server
> needs to have.
>
> I think it may be "good enough" for a 0.1.0 to have the protocol
> defined and the server be just an RI instead of a full product for a


What do you mean by RI?

> bit.
>
>>
>>
>> On 3 February 2014 15:33, Lucas Holmquist <[hidden email]
>> <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>    On Feb 3, 2014, at 9:27 AM, Summers Pittman <[hidden email]
>>    <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
>>
>>> So This should be all of the JIRAs (epics plus sub tasks)
>>>
>>> *
>>>
>>    https://issues.jboss.org/browse/AEROGEAR-1428?jql=project%20%3D%20AEROGEAR%20AND%20component%20%3D%20data-sync%20AND%20created%20%3E%3D%20-1w%20ORDER%20BY%20created%20DESC
>>>
>>> Now we need to figure out things like versions, release dates,
>>    project
>>> specific JIRAs, etc.
>>>
>>> Me PERSONALLY I think that
>>> * https://issues.jboss.org/browse/AEROGEAR-1405 and
>>> * https://issues.jboss.org/browse/AEROGEAR-1409
>>>
>>    those look pretty good and i think we have some of POC'd already
>>
>>
>>
>>> leave us in a great place for a 0.1.0 release.  It will have enough
>>> stuff done that we can say "yes this a product" but isn't so feature
>>> rich that we get bogged down in minutia.
>>>
>>> WDYT?
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> aerogear-dev mailing list
>>> [hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>
>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
>>
>>
>>    _______________________________________________
>>    aerogear-dev mailing list
>>    [hidden email] <mailto:[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
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [aerogear-dev] Sync Day 4 Sync or Swim

Summers Pittman
In reply to this post by qmx
On Mon 03 Feb 2014 09:52:02 AM EST, Douglas Campos wrote:
> Could we stop even mentioning "product"? :)
>
Great, now my mine car like mind is imaging a sync server with
micro-transactions.

For free we will sync 20 kib/s of your data.  If you want to speed it
up use 30 Gears.  You get 600 when you install the app and can buy
20,000 more for only $100 £

_______________________________________________
aerogear-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [aerogear-dev] Sync Day 4 Sync or Swim

Summers Pittman
In reply to this post by Corinne Krych
On 02/03/2014 09:53 AM, Corinne Krych wrote:

> On 03 Feb 2014, at 15:44, Summers Pittman <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> On Mon 03 Feb 2014 09:41:25 AM EST, Daniel Bevenius wrote:
>>> Just catching up on all this, but I think this looks good.
>> One quick note, I did not pay THAT much attention to what the server
>> needs to have.
>>
>> I think it may be "good enough" for a 0.1.0 to have the protocol
>> defined and the server be just an RI instead of a full product for a
>
> What do you mean by RI?
Reference implementation.



>
>> bit.
>>
>>>
>>> On 3 February 2014 15:33, Lucas Holmquist <[hidden email]
>>> <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>     On Feb 3, 2014, at 9:27 AM, Summers Pittman <[hidden email]
>>>     <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> So This should be all of the JIRAs (epics plus sub tasks)
>>>>
>>>> *
>>>>
>>>     https://issues.jboss.org/browse/AEROGEAR-1428?jql=project%20%3D%20AEROGEAR%20AND%20component%20%3D%20data-sync%20AND%20created%20%3E%3D%20-1w%20ORDER%20BY%20created%20DESC
>>>> Now we need to figure out things like versions, release dates,
>>>     project
>>>> specific JIRAs, etc.
>>>>
>>>> Me PERSONALLY I think that
>>>> * https://issues.jboss.org/browse/AEROGEAR-1405 and
>>>> * https://issues.jboss.org/browse/AEROGEAR-1409
>>>>
>>>     those look pretty good and i think we have some of POC'd already
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> leave us in a great place for a 0.1.0 release.  It will have enough
>>>> stuff done that we can say "yes this a product" but isn't so feature
>>>> rich that we get bogged down in minutia.
>>>>
>>>> WDYT?
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> aerogear-dev mailing list
>>>> [hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>
>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
>>>
>>>     _______________________________________________
>>>     aerogear-dev mailing list
>>>     [hidden email] <mailto:[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

_______________________________________________
aerogear-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [aerogear-dev] Sync Day 4 Sync or Swim

Matthias Wessendorf
In reply to this post by Summers Pittman



On Mon, Feb 3, 2014 at 3:27 PM, Summers Pittman <[hidden email]> wrote:
So This should be all of the JIRAs (epics plus sub tasks)

  *
https://issues.jboss.org/browse/AEROGEAR-1428?jql=project%20%3D%20AEROGEAR%20AND%20component%20%3D%20data-sync%20AND%20created%20%3E%3D%20-1w%20ORDER%20BY%20created%20DESC


If we figure out something else, or change our mind, we can always move/create some JIRAs.

Overall these items you created here are looking good. However I think the server needs a bit more definition, e.g. what type of adapters (e.g. Couch-Adapter, Hibernate-Adapter), assuming we agreed on this architecture, instead of embedding w/in an application (e.g. on-top of JPA/Hibernate)

 
Now we need to figure out things like versions, release dates, project
specific JIRAs, etc.

Me PERSONALLY I think that
  * https://issues.jboss.org/browse/AEROGEAR-1405 and
  * https://issues.jboss.org/browse/AEROGEAR-1409

sounds like a good starting point
 


leave us in a great place for a 0.1.0 release.  It will have enough
stuff done that we can say "yes this a product" but isn't so feature
rich that we get bogged down in minutia.

WDYT?
_______________________________________________
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
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [aerogear-dev] Sync Day 4 Sync or Swim

Matthias Wessendorf
In reply to this post by qmx



On Mon, Feb 3, 2014 at 3:52 PM, Douglas Campos <[hidden email]> wrote:
Could we stop even mentioning "product"? :)

yes !! :-)
 

--
qmx
_______________________________________________
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
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [aerogear-dev] Sync Day 4 Sync or Swim

Summers Pittman
In reply to this post by Matthias Wessendorf
On 02/03/2014 10:28 AM, Matthias Wessendorf wrote:



On Mon, Feb 3, 2014 at 3:27 PM, Summers Pittman <[hidden email]> wrote:
So This should be all of the JIRAs (epics plus sub tasks)

  *
https://issues.jboss.org/browse/AEROGEAR-1428?jql=project%20%3D%20AEROGEAR%20AND%20component%20%3D%20data-sync%20AND%20created%20%3E%3D%20-1w%20ORDER%20BY%20created%20DESC


If we figure out something else, or change our mind, we can always move/create some JIRAs.

Overall these items you created here are looking good. However I think the server needs a bit more definition, e.g. what type of adapters (e.g. Couch-Adapter, Hibernate-Adapter), assuming we agreed on this architecture, instead of embedding w/in an application (e.g. on-top of JPA/Hibernate)
I mentioned that in response to DanBev

TL;DR;  I didn't think of the server beyond "the data has to come from somewhere".  I heavily prefer having a protocol and a reference implementation that having a "you have to use this server to use this client" setup.  But that is still up for discussion.

I feel like push struck a good balance.  We have Unified push as our default implementation, but it is easy to plug in your own.

 
Now we need to figure out things like versions, release dates, project
specific JIRAs, etc.

Me PERSONALLY I think that
  * https://issues.jboss.org/browse/AEROGEAR-1405 and
  * https://issues.jboss.org/browse/AEROGEAR-1409

sounds like a good starting point
 


leave us in a great place for a 0.1.0 release.  It will have enough
stuff done that we can say "yes this a product" but isn't so feature
rich that we get bogged down in minutia.

WDYT?
_______________________________________________
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
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [aerogear-dev] Sync Day 4 Sync or Swim

Corinne Krych
It’ll help to move our client libs/ define protocol in the same direction sharing an common impl of ag-sync-server.
imo, progress need to be done here too.
++
Corinne
On 03 Feb 2014, at 16:34, Summers Pittman <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 02/03/2014 10:28 AM, Matthias Wessendorf wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Feb 3, 2014 at 3:27 PM, Summers Pittman <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> So This should be all of the JIRAs (epics plus sub tasks)
>>
>>   *
>> https://issues.jboss.org/browse/AEROGEAR-1428?jql=project%20%3D%20AEROGEAR%20AND%20component%20%3D%20data-sync%20AND%20created%20%3E%3D%20-1w%20ORDER%20BY%20created%20DESC
>>
>>
>> If we figure out something else, or change our mind, we can always move/create some JIRAs.
>>
>> Overall these items you created here are looking good. However I think the server needs a bit more definition, e.g. what type of adapters (e.g. Couch-Adapter, Hibernate-Adapter), assuming we agreed on this architecture, instead of embedding w/in an application (e.g. on-top of JPA/Hibernate)
> I mentioned that in response to DanBev
>
> TL;DR;  I didn't think of the server beyond "the data has to come from somewhere".  I heavily prefer having a protocol and a reference implementation that having a "you have to use this server to use this client" setup.  But that is still up for discussion.
>
> I feel like push struck a good balance.  We have Unified push as our default implementation, but it is easy to plug in your own.
>>
>>  
>> Now we need to figure out things like versions, release dates, project
>> specific JIRAs, etc.
>>
>> Me PERSONALLY I think that
>>   * https://issues.jboss.org/browse/AEROGEAR-1405 and
>>   * https://issues.jboss.org/browse/AEROGEAR-1409
>>
>> sounds like a good starting point
>>  
>>
>>
>> leave us in a great place for a 0.1.0 release.  It will have enough
>> stuff done that we can say "yes this a product" but isn't so feature
>> rich that we get bogged down in minutia.
>>
>> WDYT?
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [aerogear-dev] Sync Day 4 Sync or Swim

Matthias Wessendorf
In reply to this post by Summers Pittman



On Mon, Feb 3, 2014 at 4:34 PM, Summers Pittman <[hidden email]> wrote:
On 02/03/2014 10:28 AM, Matthias Wessendorf wrote:



On Mon, Feb 3, 2014 at 3:27 PM, Summers Pittman <[hidden email]> wrote:
So This should be all of the JIRAs (epics plus sub tasks)

  *
https://issues.jboss.org/browse/AEROGEAR-1428?jql=project%20%3D%20AEROGEAR%20AND%20component%20%3D%20data-sync%20AND%20created%20%3E%3D%20-1w%20ORDER%20BY%20created%20DESC


If we figure out something else, or change our mind, we can always move/create some JIRAs.

Overall these items you created here are looking good. However I think the server needs a bit more definition, e.g. what type of adapters (e.g. Couch-Adapter, Hibernate-Adapter), assuming we agreed on this architecture, instead of embedding w/in an application (e.g. on-top of JPA/Hibernate)
I mentioned that in response to DanBev

TL;DR;  I didn't think of the server beyond "the data has to come from somewhere".  I heavily prefer having a protocol and a reference implementation that having a "you have to use this server to use this client" setup.  But that is still up for discussion.

yeah not sure on just providing an RI
 

I feel like push struck a good balance.  We have Unified push as our default implementation, but it is easy to plug in your own.

hrm, sync based on UnifiedPush ? I was hope for this being a bit more flexible, or optional. hrm not sure

 


 
Now we need to figure out things like versions, release dates, project
specific JIRAs, etc.

Me PERSONALLY I think that
  * https://issues.jboss.org/browse/AEROGEAR-1405 and
  * https://issues.jboss.org/browse/AEROGEAR-1409

sounds like a good starting point
 


leave us in a great place for a 0.1.0 release.  It will have enough
stuff done that we can say "yes this a product" but isn't so feature
rich that we get bogged down in minutia.

WDYT?
_______________________________________________
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



--
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
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [aerogear-dev] Sync Day 4 Sync or Swim

Luke Holmquist

On Feb 3, 2014, at 10:50 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <[hidden email]> wrote:




On Mon, Feb 3, 2014 at 4:34 PM, Summers Pittman <[hidden email]> wrote:
On 02/03/2014 10:28 AM, Matthias Wessendorf wrote:



On Mon, Feb 3, 2014 at 3:27 PM, Summers Pittman <[hidden email]> wrote:
So This should be all of the JIRAs (epics plus sub tasks)

  *
https://issues.jboss.org/browse/AEROGEAR-1428?jql=project%20%3D%20AEROGEAR%20AND%20component%20%3D%20data-sync%20AND%20created%20%3E%3D%20-1w%20ORDER%20BY%20created%20DESC


If we figure out something else, or change our mind, we can always move/create some JIRAs.

Overall these items you created here are looking good. However I think the server needs a bit more definition, e.g. what type of adapters (e.g. Couch-Adapter, Hibernate-Adapter), assuming we agreed on this architecture, instead of embedding w/in an application (e.g. on-top of JPA/Hibernate)
I mentioned that in response to DanBev

TL;DR;  I didn't think of the server beyond "the data has to come from somewhere".  I heavily prefer having a protocol and a reference implementation that having a "you have to use this server to use this client" setup.  But that is still up for discussion.

yeah not sure on just providing an RI
 

I feel like push struck a good balance.  We have Unified push as our default implementation, but it is easy to plug in your own.

hrm, sync based on UnifiedPush ? I was hope for this being a bit more flexible, or optional. hrm not sure

i read that as the UPS being a good RI for our push server protocol, not a sync thing



 


 
Now we need to figure out things like versions, release dates, project
specific JIRAs, etc.

Me PERSONALLY I think that
  * https://issues.jboss.org/browse/AEROGEAR-1405 and
  * https://issues.jboss.org/browse/AEROGEAR-1409

sounds like a good starting point
 


leave us in a great place for a 0.1.0 release.  It will have enough
stuff done that we can say "yes this a product" but isn't so feature
rich that we get bogged down in minutia.

WDYT?
_______________________________________________
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



--
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
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [aerogear-dev] Sync Day 4 Sync or Swim

Corinne Krych

On 03 Feb 2014, at 16:52, Lucas Holmquist <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> On Feb 3, 2014, at 10:50 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Feb 3, 2014 at 4:34 PM, Summers Pittman <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> On 02/03/2014 10:28 AM, Matthias Wessendorf wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Feb 3, 2014 at 3:27 PM, Summers Pittman <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> So This should be all of the JIRAs (epics plus sub tasks)
>>>
>>>   *
>>> https://issues.jboss.org/browse/AEROGEAR-1428?jql=project%20%3D%20AEROGEAR%20AND%20component%20%3D%20data-sync%20AND%20created%20%3E%3D%20-1w%20ORDER%20BY%20created%20DESC
>>>
>>>
>>> If we figure out something else, or change our mind, we can always move/create some JIRAs.
>>>
>>> Overall these items you created here are looking good. However I think the server needs a bit more definition, e.g. what type of adapters (e.g. Couch-Adapter, Hibernate-Adapter), assuming we agreed on this architecture, instead of embedding w/in an application (e.g. on-top of JPA/Hibernate)
>> I mentioned that in response to DanBev
>>
>> TL;DR;  I didn't think of the server beyond "the data has to come from somewhere".  I heavily prefer having a protocol and a reference implementation that having a "you have to use this server to use this client" setup.  But that is still up for discussion.
>>
>> yeah not sure on just providing an RI
>>  
>>
>> I feel like push struck a good balance.  We have Unified push as our default implementation, but it is easy to plug in your own.
>>
>> hrm, sync based on UnifiedPush ? I was hope for this being a bit more flexible, or optional. hrm not sure
>
> i read that as the UPS being a good RI for our push server protocol, not a sync thing

Same here,
but moving forward server part will help define Ri imo

>
>
>>
>>  
>>
>>>
>>>  
>>> Now we need to figure out things like versions, release dates, project
>>> specific JIRAs, etc.
>>>
>>> Me PERSONALLY I think that
>>>   * https://issues.jboss.org/browse/AEROGEAR-1405 and
>>>   * https://issues.jboss.org/browse/AEROGEAR-1409
>>>
>>> sounds like a good starting point
>>>  
>>>
>>>
>>> leave us in a great place for a 0.1.0 release.  It will have enough
>>> stuff done that we can say "yes this a product" but isn't so feature
>>> rich that we get bogged down in minutia.
>>>
>>> WDYT?
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> 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
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [aerogear-dev] Sync Day 4 Sync or Swim

Summers Pittman
In reply to this post by Luke Holmquist
On 02/03/2014 10:52 AM, Lucas Holmquist wrote:

On Feb 3, 2014, at 10:50 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <[hidden email]> wrote:




On Mon, Feb 3, 2014 at 4:34 PM, Summers Pittman <[hidden email]> wrote:
On 02/03/2014 10:28 AM, Matthias Wessendorf wrote:



On Mon, Feb 3, 2014 at 3:27 PM, Summers Pittman <[hidden email]> wrote:
So This should be all of the JIRAs (epics plus sub tasks)

  *
https://issues.jboss.org/browse/AEROGEAR-1428?jql=project%20%3D%20AEROGEAR%20AND%20component%20%3D%20data-sync%20AND%20created%20%3E%3D%20-1w%20ORDER%20BY%20created%20DESC


If we figure out something else, or change our mind, we can always move/create some JIRAs.

Overall these items you created here are looking good. However I think the server needs a bit more definition, e.g. what type of adapters (e.g. Couch-Adapter, Hibernate-Adapter), assuming we agreed on this architecture, instead of embedding w/in an application (e.g. on-top of JPA/Hibernate)
I mentioned that in response to DanBev

TL;DR;  I didn't think of the server beyond "the data has to come from somewhere".  I heavily prefer having a protocol and a reference implementation that having a "you have to use this server to use this client" setup.  But that is still up for discussion.

yeah not sure on just providing an RI
 

I feel like push struck a good balance.  We have Unified push as our default implementation, but it is easy to plug in your own.

hrm, sync based on UnifiedPush ? I was hope for this being a bit more flexible, or optional. hrm not sure

i read that as the UPS being a good RI for our push server protocol, not a sync thing
I was more talking about the interaction among APIs, implementations, protocols and servers.

It is easy to add your own messaging system into the Push APIs (on Android anyway).  We provide an implementation for connecting to the Unified push server however.



 


 
Now we need to figure out things like versions, release dates, project
specific JIRAs, etc.

Me PERSONALLY I think that
  * https://issues.jboss.org/browse/AEROGEAR-1405 and
  * https://issues.jboss.org/browse/AEROGEAR-1409

sounds like a good starting point
 


leave us in a great place for a 0.1.0 release.  It will have enough
stuff done that we can say "yes this a product" but isn't so feature
rich that we get bogged down in minutia.

WDYT?
_______________________________________________
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



--
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
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [aerogear-dev] Sync Day 4 Sync or Swim

Matthias Wessendorf



On Mon, Feb 3, 2014 at 4:55 PM, Summers Pittman <[hidden email]> wrote:
On 02/03/2014 10:52 AM, Lucas Holmquist wrote:

On Feb 3, 2014, at 10:50 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <[hidden email]> wrote:




On Mon, Feb 3, 2014 at 4:34 PM, Summers Pittman <[hidden email]> wrote:
On 02/03/2014 10:28 AM, Matthias Wessendorf wrote:



On Mon, Feb 3, 2014 at 3:27 PM, Summers Pittman <[hidden email]> wrote:
So This should be all of the JIRAs (epics plus sub tasks)

  *
https://issues.jboss.org/browse/AEROGEAR-1428?jql=project%20%3D%20AEROGEAR%20AND%20component%20%3D%20data-sync%20AND%20created%20%3E%3D%20-1w%20ORDER%20BY%20created%20DESC


If we figure out something else, or change our mind, we can always move/create some JIRAs.

Overall these items you created here are looking good. However I think the server needs a bit more definition, e.g. what type of adapters (e.g. Couch-Adapter, Hibernate-Adapter), assuming we agreed on this architecture, instead of embedding w/in an application (e.g. on-top of JPA/Hibernate)
I mentioned that in response to DanBev

TL;DR;  I didn't think of the server beyond "the data has to come from somewhere".  I heavily prefer having a protocol and a reference implementation that having a "you have to use this server to use this client" setup.  But that is still up for discussion.

yeah not sure on just providing an RI
 

I feel like push struck a good balance.  We have Unified push as our default implementation, but it is easy to plug in your own.

hrm, sync based on UnifiedPush ? I was hope for this being a bit more flexible, or optional. hrm not sure

i read that as the UPS being a good RI for our push server protocol, not a sync thing
I was more talking about the interaction among APIs, implementations, protocols and servers.

It is easy to add your own messaging system into the Push APIs (on Android anyway). 

yep - but not on iOS/SimplePush clients

And than I really 'fear' that our different client API might really be Android versus iOS/SimplePush at the end of the day;
Not sure, but I feel at the end they are all really different.
 
We provide an implementation for connecting to the Unified push server however.




 


 
Now we need to figure out things like versions, release dates, project
specific JIRAs, etc.

Me PERSONALLY I think that
  * https://issues.jboss.org/browse/AEROGEAR-1405 and
  * https://issues.jboss.org/browse/AEROGEAR-1409

sounds like a good starting point
 


leave us in a great place for a 0.1.0 release.  It will have enough
stuff done that we can say "yes this a product" but isn't so feature
rich that we get bogged down in minutia.

WDYT?
_______________________________________________
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



--
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



--
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