[aerogear-dev] message format change proposal

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

[aerogear-dev] message format change proposal

Erik Jan de Wit
Hi,

With the upcoming windows support and simple push change (making simple push more like 'normal') the number of ‘special’ keys in our message is increasing. Right now we are mixing our ‘special’ keys with those the user can add, but we keep simple push out of it:

{
       "variants" : ["c3f0a94f-48de-4b77-a08e-68114460857e", "444939cd-ae63-4ce1-96a4-de74b77e3737" ....],
       "alias" : ["[hidden email]", "[hidden email]", ....],
       "categories" : ["someCategory", "otherCategory"],
       "deviceType" : ["iPad", "AndroidTablet"],
       "ttl" : 3600,
       "message": {
         "alert":"HELLO!",
         "sound":"default",
         "badge":7,
         "content-available" : true,
         "action-category" : "some_category",
         
         "someKey":"some value",
         "anotherCustomKey":"some other value"
       },
"simple-push": "version=123”
}


As simple push is going to be more like ‘normal’ push why not move the simple-push into the message as well. As for the windows support there are a lot more types of messages you can send. The most normal form is called ‘toast’, but there are other ones for when you app is pinned to the home screen. Then one can send message that contain pictures. To support all of this we need something like this: https://gist.github.com/edewit/305d76c31960aa6254a9

Adding all these ‘special’ keys will make it easier to get into a conflict with the users own data, so I propose we put the user data into a separate data object, like so:

{
       "variants" : ["c3f0a94f-48de-4b77-a08e-68114460857e", "444939cd-ae63-4ce1-96a4-de74b77e3737" ....],
       "alias" : ["[hidden email]", "[hidden email]", ....],
       "categories" : ["someCategory", "otherCategory"],
       "deviceType" : ["iPad", "AndroidTablet"],
       "ttl" : 3600,
       "message": {
         "alert":"HELLO!",
         "sound":"default",
         "badge":7,
         "content-available" : true,
         "action-category" : "some_category",
         "simple-push": "version=123",
         "data" : {
             "someKey":"some value",
             "anotherCustomKey":"some other value"
            }
       }
}


WDYT?

Cheers,
Erik Jan

_______________________________________________
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] message format change proposal

Corinne Krych
+1 on a custom-data section.
Going even further as we add more platforms support, I think having sth like cordova push config:
http://aerogear.org/docs/guides/aerogear-cordova/AerogearCordovaPush/#_sample_example
where you have platform specific section would be nice.

++
Corinne
 
On 21 Aug 2014, at 13:09, Erik Jan de Wit <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> With the upcoming windows support and simple push change (making simple push more like 'normal') the number of ‘special’ keys in our message is increasing. Right now we are mixing our ‘special’ keys with those the user can add, but we keep simple push out of it:
>
> {
>
>        
> "variants" : ["c3f0a94f-48de-4b77-a08e-68114460857e", "444939cd-ae63-4ce1-96a4-de74b77e3737" ....],
>
>        
> "alias" : ["[hidden email]", "[hidden email]", ....],
>
>        
> "categories" : ["someCategory", "otherCategory"],
>
>        
> "deviceType" : ["iPad", "AndroidTablet"],
>
>        
> "ttl" : 3600,
>
>        
> "message": {
>
>          
> "alert":"HELLO!",
>
>          
> "sound":"default",
>
>          
> "badge":7,
>
>          
> "content-available" : true,
>
>          
> "action-category" : "some_category",
>
>          
>          
> "someKey":"some value",
>
>          
> "anotherCustomKey":"some other value"
>
>        
> },
> "simple-push": "version=123”
> }
>
>
> As simple push is going to be more like ‘normal’ push why not move the simple-push into the message as well. As for the windows support there are a lot more types of messages you can send. The most normal form is called ‘toast’, but there are other ones for when you app is pinned to the home screen. Then one can send message that contain pictures. To support all of this we need something like this: https://gist.github.com/edewit/305d76c31960aa6254a9
>
> Adding all these ‘special’ keys will make it easier to get into a conflict with the users own data, so I propose we put the user data into a separate data object, like so:
>
> {
>
>        
> "variants" : ["c3f0a94f-48de-4b77-a08e-68114460857e", "444939cd-ae63-4ce1-96a4-de74b77e3737" ....],
>
>        
> "alias" : ["[hidden email]", "[hidden email]", ....],
>
>        
> "categories" : ["someCategory", "otherCategory"],
>
>        
> "deviceType" : ["iPad", "AndroidTablet"],
>
>        
> "ttl" : 3600,
>
>        
> "message": {
>
>          
> "alert":"HELLO!",
>
>          
> "sound":"default",
>
>          
> "badge":7,
>
>          
> "content-available" : true,
>
>          
> "action-category" : "some_category",
>          "simple-push": "version=123",
>
>          
> "data" : {
>
>              
> "someKey":"some value",
>
>              
> "anotherCustomKey":"some other value"
>
>            
> }
>
>        
> }
> }
>
>
> WDYT?
>
> Cheers,
> Erik Jan
> _______________________________________________
> 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] message format change proposal

Matthias Wessendorf
In reply to this post by Erik Jan de Wit
Hi Erik,

overall I am not against changes for 1.1.x, on our master branch. Here is something that Sebi mentioned a few month ago: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/AGPUSH-534

With some API change, coming up, let's not forget about "REST API Versioning", he discussed at our Face2Face meeting: http://oksoclap.com/p/jbrS1EHWkI
(looks like in that session the majority preferred headers over URI).

We have to support the 1.0.0 APIs for quite a while.

-Matthias




On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 1:09 PM, Erik Jan de Wit <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi,

With the upcoming windows support and simple push change (making simple push more like 'normal') the number of ‘special’ keys in our message is increasing. Right now we are mixing our ‘special’ keys with those the user can add, but we keep simple push out of it:

{
       "variants" : ["c3f0a94f-48de-4b77-a08e-68114460857e", "444939cd-ae63-4ce1-96a4-de74b77e3737" ....],
       "alias" : ["[hidden email]", "[hidden email]", ....],
       "categories" : ["someCategory", "otherCategory"],
       "deviceType" : ["iPad", "AndroidTablet"],
       "ttl" : 3600,
       "message": {
         "alert":"HELLO!",
         "sound":"default",
         "badge":7,
         "content-available" : true,
         "action-category" : "some_category",
         
         "someKey":"some value",
         "anotherCustomKey":"some other value"
       },
"simple-push": "version=123”
}


As simple push is going to be more like ‘normal’ push why not move the simple-push into the message as well. As for the windows support there are a lot more types of messages you can send. The most normal form is called ‘toast’, but there are other ones for when you app is pinned to the home screen. Then one can send message that contain pictures. To support all of this we need something like this: https://gist.github.com/edewit/305d76c31960aa6254a9

Adding all these ‘special’ keys will make it easier to get into a conflict with the users own data, so I propose we put the user data into a separate data object, like so:

{
       "variants" : ["c3f0a94f-48de-4b77-a08e-68114460857e", "444939cd-ae63-4ce1-96a4-de74b77e3737" ....],
       "alias" : ["[hidden email]", "[hidden email]", ....],
       "categories" : ["someCategory", "otherCategory"],
       "deviceType" : ["iPad", "AndroidTablet"],
       "ttl" : 3600,
       "message": {
         "alert":"HELLO!",
         "sound":"default",
         "badge":7,
         "content-available" : true,
         "action-category" : "some_category",
         "simple-push": "version=123",
         "data" : {
             "someKey":"some value",
             "anotherCustomKey":"some other value"
            }
       }
}


WDYT?

Cheers,
Erik Jan

_______________________________________________
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] message format change proposal

Matthias Wessendorf
In reply to this post by Corinne Krych



On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 1:30 PM, Corinne Krych <[hidden email]> wrote:
+1 on a custom-data section.
Going even further as we add more platforms support, I think having sth like cordova push config:
http://aerogear.org/docs/guides/aerogear-cordova/AerogearCordovaPush/#_sample_example
where you have platform specific section would be nice.

perhaps, not fully convinced atm. Original idea was to have a simple format for multiple platforms. 
 

++
Corinne

On 21 Aug 2014, at 13:09, Erik Jan de Wit <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> With the upcoming windows support and simple push change (making simple push more like 'normal') the number of ‘special’ keys in our message is increasing. Right now we are mixing our ‘special’ keys with those the user can add, but we keep simple push out of it:
>
> {
>
>
> "variants" : ["c3f0a94f-48de-4b77-a08e-68114460857e", "444939cd-ae63-4ce1-96a4-de74b77e3737" ....],
>
>
> "alias" : ["[hidden email]", "[hidden email]", ....],
>
>
> "categories" : ["someCategory", "otherCategory"],
>
>
> "deviceType" : ["iPad", "AndroidTablet"],
>
>
> "ttl" : 3600,
>
>
> "message": {
>
>
> "alert":"HELLO!",
>
>
> "sound":"default",
>
>
> "badge":7,
>
>
> "content-available" : true,
>
>
> "action-category" : "some_category",
>
>
>
> "someKey":"some value",
>
>
> "anotherCustomKey":"some other value"
>
>
> },
> "simple-push": "version=123”
> }
>
>
> As simple push is going to be more like ‘normal’ push why not move the simple-push into the message as well. As for the windows support there are a lot more types of messages you can send. The most normal form is called ‘toast’, but there are other ones for when you app is pinned to the home screen. Then one can send message that contain pictures. To support all of this we need something like this: https://gist.github.com/edewit/305d76c31960aa6254a9
>
> Adding all these ‘special’ keys will make it easier to get into a conflict with the users own data, so I propose we put the user data into a separate data object, like so:
>
> {
>
>
> "variants" : ["c3f0a94f-48de-4b77-a08e-68114460857e", "444939cd-ae63-4ce1-96a4-de74b77e3737" ....],
>
>
> "alias" : ["[hidden email]", "[hidden email]", ....],
>
>
> "categories" : ["someCategory", "otherCategory"],
>
>
> "deviceType" : ["iPad", "AndroidTablet"],
>
>
> "ttl" : 3600,
>
>
> "message": {
>
>
> "alert":"HELLO!",
>
>
> "sound":"default",
>
>
> "badge":7,
>
>
> "content-available" : true,
>
>
> "action-category" : "some_category",
>          "simple-push": "version=123",
>
>
> "data" : {
>
>
> "someKey":"some value",
>
>
> "anotherCustomKey":"some other value"
>
>
> }
>
>
> }
> }
>
>
> WDYT?
>
> Cheers,
>       Erik Jan
> _______________________________________________
> 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] message format change proposal

Erik Jan de Wit
In reply to this post by Matthias Wessendorf

overall I am not against changes for 1.1.x, on our master branch. Here is something that Sebi mentioned a few month ago: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/AGPUSH-534

right I like this as well, but here the users data is also mixed with the message, that was the point.


With some API change, coming up, let's not forget about "REST API Versioning", he discussed at our Face2Face meeting: http://oksoclap.com/p/jbrS1EHWkI
(looks like in that session the majority preferred headers over URI).

We have to support the 1.0.0 APIs for quite a while.

Sure, but because we have a version can’t mean that we cannot change things I hope. We just need to have a good mechanism inlace to maintain these versions. 



_______________________________________________
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] message format change proposal

Matthias Wessendorf



On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 1:46 PM, Erik Jan de Wit <[hidden email]> wrote:

overall I am not against changes for 1.1.x, on our master branch. Here is something that Sebi mentioned a few month ago: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/AGPUSH-534

right I like this as well, but here the users data is also mixed with the message, that was the point.


With some API change, coming up, let's not forget about "REST API Versioning", he discussed at our Face2Face meeting: http://oksoclap.com/p/jbrS1EHWkI
(looks like in that session the majority preferred headers over URI).

We have to support the 1.0.0 APIs for quite a while.

Sure, but because we have a version can’t mean that we cannot change things I hope.

nah, not at all :-) That's why we discussed 'REST API Versioning' at the meeting
 
We just need to have a good mechanism inlace to maintain these versions. 


yep, I'd say once that is in place, we can look at changing APIs  



_______________________________________________
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] message format change proposal

Matthias Wessendorf
In reply to this post by Erik Jan de Wit
found it :-) 

On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 1:09 PM, Erik Jan de Wit <[hidden email]> wrote:
{
       "variants" : ["c3f0a94f-48de-4b77-a08e-68114460857e", "444939cd-ae63-4ce1-96a4-de74b77e3737" ....],
       "alias" : ["[hidden email]", "[hidden email]", ....],
       "categories" : ["someCategory", "otherCategory"],
       "deviceType" : ["iPad", "AndroidTablet"],
       "ttl" : 3600,
       "message": {
         "alert":"HELLO!",
         "sound":"default",
         "badge":7,
         "content-available" : true,
         "action-category" : "some_category",
         "simple-push": "version=123",
         "data" : {
             "someKey":"some value",
             "anotherCustomKey":"some other value"
            }
       }
}

I think I do like 'data' better than 'payload' (from the PR)

-M


 


WDYT?

Cheers,
Erik Jan

_______________________________________________
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] message format change proposal

Sebastien Blanc


On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 6:07 PM, Matthias Wessendorf <[hidden email]> wrote:
found it :-) 

On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 1:09 PM, Erik Jan de Wit <[hidden email]> wrote:
{
       "variants" : ["c3f0a94f-48de-4b77-a08e-68114460857e", "444939cd-ae63-4ce1-96a4-de74b77e3737" ....],
       "alias" : ["[hidden email]", "[hidden email]", ....],
       "categories" : ["someCategory", "otherCategory"],
       "deviceType" : ["iPad", "AndroidTablet"],
       "ttl" : 3600,
       "message": {
         "alert":"HELLO!",
         "sound":"default",
         "badge":7,
         "content-available" : true,
         "action-category" : "some_category",
         "simple-push": "version=123",
         "data" : {
             "someKey":"some value",
             "anotherCustomKey":"some other value"
            }
       }
}

I think I do like 'data' better than 'payload' (from the PR)
Sounds good to me or 'custom-data'
  

-M


 


WDYT?

Cheers,
Erik Jan

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

Re: [aerogear-dev] message format change proposal

qmx
Administrator
'payload' is the term used for this kind of "in-message custom data"
since the early years of EIP tools (before camel was born)

Any strong reason to avoid it?

Also, as others pointed out, we have json keys with dashes, is this
really desired? because consistency :)


--
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] message format change proposal

Matthias Wessendorf


On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 3:15 PM, Douglas Campos <[hidden email]> wrote:
'payload' is the term used for this kind of "in-message custom data"
since the early years of EIP tools (before camel was born)

nested payload, inside of message, I am not sure

 

Any strong reason to avoid it?

Also, as others pointed out, we have json keys with dashes, is this
really desired? because consistency :)

yeah, we have a few, to stay in sync a/ le apple (action-category and content-available)


 


--
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] message format change proposal

Erik Jan de Wit
On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 3:15 PM, Douglas Campos <[hidden email]> wrote:
'payload' is the term used for this kind of "in-message custom data"
since the early years of EIP tools (before camel was born)

nested payload, inside of message, I am not sure


Thinking a bit more about it, I don’t like data (it’s to generic everything is data) and I don’t like payload either (because everything is message payload) can’t we use something like ‘customData’ , ‘userData’, `userKeys` or perhaps something that says a little bit more to what this is.

 

Any strong reason to avoid it?

yeah, let’s keep the once that are there because the are consistent with apple

_______________________________________________
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] message format change proposal

Matthias Wessendorf


On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 3:30 PM, Erik Jan de Wit <[hidden email]> wrote:
On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 3:15 PM, Douglas Campos <[hidden email]> wrote:
'payload' is the term used for this kind of "in-message custom data"
since the early years of EIP tools (before camel was born)

nested payload, inside of message, I am not sure


Thinking a bit more about it, I don’t like data (it’s to generic everything is data) and I don’t like payload either (because everything is message payload)

I hear you! data is pretty generic
 
can’t we use something like ‘customData’ , ‘userData’, `userKeys` or perhaps something that says a little bit more to what this is.

Good suggestions, I do like user-data!

:)

 


 

Any strong reason to avoid it?

yeah, let’s keep the once that are there because the are consistent with apple

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

Re: [aerogear-dev] message format change proposal

qmx
Administrator
In reply to this post by Erik Jan de Wit
On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 03:30:51PM +0100, Erik Jan de Wit wrote:

> > On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 3:15 PM, Douglas Campos <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > 'payload' is the term used for this kind of "in-message custom data"
> > since the early years of EIP tools (before camel was born)
> >
> > nested payload, inside of message, I am not sure
> >
>
> Thinking a bit more about it, I don’t like data (it’s to generic
> everything is data) and I don’t like payload either (because
> everything is message payload) can’t we use something like
> ‘customData’ , ‘userData’, `userKeys` or perhaps something that says a
> little bit more to what this is.
+1 to userData, clearly communicates intent (if y'all dislike payload) :D

--
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] message format change proposal

Matthias Wessendorf


On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 5:50 PM, Douglas Campos <[hidden email]> wrote:
On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 03:30:51PM +0100, Erik Jan de Wit wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 3:15 PM, Douglas Campos <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > 'payload' is the term used for this kind of "in-message custom data"
> > since the early years of EIP tools (before camel was born)
> >
> > nested payload, inside of message, I am not sure
> >
>
> Thinking a bit more about it, I don’t like data (it’s to generic
> everything is data) and I don’t like payload either (because
> everything is message payload) can’t we use something like
> ‘customData’ , ‘userData’, `userKeys` or perhaps something that says a
> little bit more to what this is.
+1 to userData, clearly communicates intent (if y'all dislike payload) :D

how about user-data  ? 
(due to consistency ?) :)


 

--
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] message format change proposal

Daniel Passos-2
-1 to payload, +1 to user-data || userData

-- Passos

On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 4:36 PM, Matthias Wessendorf <[hidden email]> wrote:


On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 5:50 PM, Douglas Campos <[hidden email]> wrote:
On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 03:30:51PM +0100, Erik Jan de Wit wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 3:15 PM, Douglas Campos <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > 'payload' is the term used for this kind of "in-message custom data"
> > since the early years of EIP tools (before camel was born)
> >
> > nested payload, inside of message, I am not sure
> >
>
> Thinking a bit more about it, I don’t like data (it’s to generic
> everything is data) and I don’t like payload either (because
> everything is message payload) can’t we use something like
> ‘customData’ , ‘userData’, `userKeys` or perhaps something that says a
> little bit more to what this is.
+1 to userData, clearly communicates intent (if y'all dislike payload) :D

how about user-data  ? 
(due to consistency ?) :)


 

--
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


_______________________________________________
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] message format change proposal

cvasilak
+1 for user-data

-
Christos


On Oct 28, 2014, at 2:30 AM, Daniel Passos <[hidden email]> wrote:

-1 to payload, +1 to user-data || userData

-- Passos

On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 4:36 PM, Matthias Wessendorf <[hidden email]> wrote:


On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 5:50 PM, Douglas Campos <[hidden email]> wrote:
On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 03:30:51PM +0100, Erik Jan de Wit wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 3:15 PM, Douglas Campos <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > 'payload' is the term used for this kind of "in-message custom data"
> > since the early years of EIP tools (before camel was born)
> >
> > nested payload, inside of message, I am not sure
> >
>
> Thinking a bit more about it, I don’t like data (it’s to generic
> everything is data) and I don’t like payload either (because
> everything is message payload) can’t we use something like
> ‘customData’ , ‘userData’, `userKeys` or perhaps something that says a
> little bit more to what this is.
+1 to userData, clearly communicates intent (if y'all dislike payload) :D

how about user-data  ? 
(due to consistency ?) :)


 

--
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

_______________________________________________
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] message format change proposal

danielbevenius
+1 for user-data

On 28 October 2014 08:11, Christos Vasilakis <[hidden email]> wrote:
+1 for user-data

-
Christos


On Oct 28, 2014, at 2:30 AM, Daniel Passos <[hidden email]> wrote:

-1 to payload, +1 to user-data || userData

-- Passos

On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 4:36 PM, Matthias Wessendorf <[hidden email]> wrote:


On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 5:50 PM, Douglas Campos <[hidden email]> wrote:
On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 03:30:51PM +0100, Erik Jan de Wit wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 3:15 PM, Douglas Campos <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > 'payload' is the term used for this kind of "in-message custom data"
> > since the early years of EIP tools (before camel was born)
> >
> > nested payload, inside of message, I am not sure
> >
>
> Thinking a bit more about it, I don’t like data (it’s to generic
> everything is data) and I don’t like payload either (because
> everything is message payload) can’t we use something like
> ‘customData’ , ‘userData’, `userKeys` or perhaps something that says a
> little bit more to what this is.
+1 to userData, clearly communicates intent (if y'all dislike payload) :D

how about user-data  ? 
(due to consistency ?) :)


 

--
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

_______________________________________________
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] message format change proposal

Sebastien Blanc
Okay "user-data" seems to be the winner ;) 
Let's go for that  !

NB : For the JavaSender, it will be camelCased  message.userData(...)



On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 8:17 AM, Daniel Bevenius <[hidden email]> wrote:
+1 for user-data

On 28 October 2014 08:11, Christos Vasilakis <[hidden email]> wrote:
+1 for user-data

-
Christos


On Oct 28, 2014, at 2:30 AM, Daniel Passos <[hidden email]> wrote:

-1 to payload, +1 to user-data || userData

-- Passos

On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 4:36 PM, Matthias Wessendorf <[hidden email]> wrote:


On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 5:50 PM, Douglas Campos <[hidden email]> wrote:
On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 03:30:51PM +0100, Erik Jan de Wit wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 3:15 PM, Douglas Campos <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > 'payload' is the term used for this kind of "in-message custom data"
> > since the early years of EIP tools (before camel was born)
> >
> > nested payload, inside of message, I am not sure
> >
>
> Thinking a bit more about it, I don’t like data (it’s to generic
> everything is data) and I don’t like payload either (because
> everything is message payload) can’t we use something like
> ‘customData’ , ‘userData’, `userKeys` or perhaps something that says a
> little bit more to what this is.
+1 to userData, clearly communicates intent (if y'all dislike payload) :D

how about user-data  ? 
(due to consistency ?) :)


 

--
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

_______________________________________________
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] message format change proposal

Matthias Wessendorf


On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 2:15 PM, Sebastien Blanc <[hidden email]> wrote:
Okay "user-data" seems to be the winner ;) 
Let's go for that  !

NB : For the JavaSender, it will be camelCased  message.userData(...)

+1
 



On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 8:17 AM, Daniel Bevenius <[hidden email]> wrote:
+1 for user-data

On 28 October 2014 08:11, Christos Vasilakis <[hidden email]> wrote:
+1 for user-data

-
Christos


On Oct 28, 2014, at 2:30 AM, Daniel Passos <[hidden email]> wrote:

-1 to payload, +1 to user-data || userData

-- Passos

On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 4:36 PM, Matthias Wessendorf <[hidden email]> wrote:


On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 5:50 PM, Douglas Campos <[hidden email]> wrote:
On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 03:30:51PM +0100, Erik Jan de Wit wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 3:15 PM, Douglas Campos <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > 'payload' is the term used for this kind of "in-message custom data"
> > since the early years of EIP tools (before camel was born)
> >
> > nested payload, inside of message, I am not sure
> >
>
> Thinking a bit more about it, I don’t like data (it’s to generic
> everything is data) and I don’t like payload either (because
> everything is message payload) can’t we use something like
> ‘customData’ , ‘userData’, `userKeys` or perhaps something that says a
> little bit more to what this is.
+1 to userData, clearly communicates intent (if y'all dislike payload) :D

how about user-data  ? 
(due to consistency ?) :)


 

--
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

_______________________________________________
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



--
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] message format change proposal

Luke Holmquist

On Oct 28, 2014, at 9:21 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <[hidden email]> wrote:



On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 2:15 PM, Sebastien Blanc <[hidden email]> wrote:
Okay "user-data" seems to be the winner ;) 
Let's go for that  !

NB : For the JavaSender, it will be camelCased  message.userData(...)

+1

should be no change other than docs for the node sender then

 



On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 8:17 AM, Daniel Bevenius <[hidden email]> wrote:
+1 for user-data

On 28 October 2014 08:11, Christos Vasilakis <[hidden email]> wrote:
+1 for user-data

-
Christos


On Oct 28, 2014, at 2:30 AM, Daniel Passos <[hidden email]> wrote:

-1 to payload, +1 to user-data || userData

-- Passos

On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 4:36 PM, Matthias Wessendorf <[hidden email]> wrote:


On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 5:50 PM, Douglas Campos <[hidden email]> wrote:
On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 03:30:51PM +0100, Erik Jan de Wit wrote:

> > On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 3:15 PM, Douglas Campos <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > 'payload' is the term used for this kind of "in-message custom data"
> > since the early years of EIP tools (before camel was born)
> >
> > nested payload, inside of message, I am not sure
> >
>
> Thinking a bit more about it, I don’t like data (it’s to generic
> everything is data) and I don’t like payload either (because
> everything is message payload) can’t we use something like
> ‘customData’ , ‘userData’, `userKeys` or perhaps something that says a
> little bit more to what this is.
+1 to userData, clearly communicates intent (if y'all dislike payload) :D

how about user-data  ? 
(due to consistency ?) :)


 

--
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

_______________________________________________
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



-- 
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