[feedhenry-dev] mobile client or mobile app
Paul Wright
pwright at redhat.com
Wed Dec 13 17:04:34 UTC 2017
Ok, first, others reopened this wound, not me!
But I thought it was interesting that Microsoft (of all people) have a
notion of the 'inner loop' of a developer's workflow, where developers
are trying to avoid the complexity of reality, and instead create a
'Draft': Streamlining Kubernetes development with Draft
<https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/blog/streamlining-kubernetes-development-with-draft/>
Not that we're doing a similar thing, but is there a point to thinking
beyond the 'construct', to the emulation/demo, while also hanging a bit
to MS coattails?
Paul
On 12/13/2017 04:36 PM, Matthias Wessendorf wrote:
> mobile app build ?
>
> On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 5:28 PM, Chris Shinn <cshinn at redhat.com
> <mailto:cshinn at redhat.com>> wrote:
>
> That said, I do think that there’s value in “app”. Especially
> because of its ubiquity, it’s likely to be the “search term" that
> people are looking for when they are trying to find parts of the
> interface that are relevant to their current task.
>
>
> On December 13, 2017 at 10:59:54 AM, David Martin
> (davmarti at redhat.com <mailto:davmarti at redhat.com>) wrote:
>
>> I thought this was interesting.
>>
>> Chris Shinn (UX) came up with the term 'Mobile Client Build' in
>> UI mockups for mobile apps on the OpenShift overview screen.
>> This was to make it obvious we're talking about 'Mobile' builds
>> rather than typical S2I or Docker builds.
>>
>>
>>
>> Inline images 1
>>
>> On 30 November 2017 at 14:13, Matthias Wessendorf
>> <mwessend at redhat.com <mailto:mwessend at redhat.com>> wrote:
>>
>> I like that - and is similar to UPS terminology :)
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 2:23 PM, John Frizelle
>> <jfrizell at redhat.com <mailto:jfrizell at redhat.com>> wrote:
>>
>> perhaps "construct" instead of "container configuration"
>>
>> MobileClient: A construct that represents the overall
>> mobile application on OpenShift (eg MobileHR)
>>
>>
>> --
>> John Frizelle
>> Chief Architect, Red Hat Mobile
>> Consulting Engineer
>>
>> mobile:*+353 87 290 1644 <tel://+353872901644>*
>> twitter:* @johnfriz*
>> skype: *john_frizelle*
>> mail: *jfrizell at redhat.com <mailto:jfrizell at redhat.com>*
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 30 November 2017 at 11:48, Matthias Wessendorf
>> <mwessend at redhat.com <mailto:mwessend at redhat.com>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 12:05 PM, Paul Wright
>> <pwright at redhat.com <mailto:pwright at redhat.com>> wrote:
>>
>> last comment, then I'll stop (promise):
>>
>> Let's go with MobileClient, as discussed below,
>> but take a bit more time about the definition.
>>
>> I think the definition for PushApplication is
>> great in the context of UPS, but with MCP, we're
>> trying to explain an item that is front and
>> center, and that the user might misunderstand, or
>> not act as expected.
>>
>> Can we be more explicit and give an example?
>>
>> - MobileClient: A container configuration that
>> represents the overall mobile application on
>> OpenShift (eg MobileHR)
>>
>>
>> container ... hrm - not sure - that's also
>> misleading... ?!
>>
>>
>>
>> Paul
>>
>>
>> On 11/30/2017 10:26 AM, Matthias Wessendorf wrote:
>>> +1 on something like "logical construct /
>>> logical representation" - and right UPS has
>>> also had some naming struggles :)
>>>
>>> On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 11:11 AM, David Martin
>>> <davmarti at redhat.com
>>> <mailto:davmarti at redhat.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>> The term 'Resource' may not suit as it has a
>>> meaning in the Kubernetes world.
>>> Any object that kubernetes exposes an API
>>> for is a resource e.g. Secrets, Pods,
>>> Deployments are all resources.
>>>
>>> In UPS, there's the idea of a 'Push
>>> Application', defined here [1]
>>> "PushApplication
>>> A logical construct that represents an
>>> overall mobile application"
>>>
>>> I don't see any problem with giving it a
>>> name like 'Mobile Client' and calling it out
>>> in terminology in a similar manner
>>> "MobileClient
>>> A logical construct that represents an
>>> overall mobile application"
>>>
>>> [1]
>>> https://aerogear.org/docs/unifiedpush/ups_userguide/index/#_useful_terminology
>>> <https://aerogear.org/docs/unifiedpush/ups_userguide/index/#_useful_terminology>
>>>
>>> On 29 November 2017 at 09:42, Paul Wright
>>> <pwright at redhat.com
>>> <mailto:pwright at redhat.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>> and that conversation makes me think we
>>> need to be more descriptive, eg
>>>
>>> Mobile App Resource Client (MARC)
>>>
>>> Paul
>>>
>>>
>>> On 11/29/2017 09:38 AM, Craig Brookes wrote:
>>>> Spoke with Paul offline. And he thought
>>>> we were referring to mobile app through
>>>> out our docs. So to clarify I meant
>>>> with the context of the mcp UI and CLI.
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 11:49 AM, Paul
>>>> Wright <pwright at redhat.com
>>>> <mailto:pwright at redhat.com>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> It seems to me that to tackle the
>>>> mobile market, we should embrace
>>>> the lingua franca, and the one word
>>>> that unites mobile,cell phone,
>>>> smartphone, handys, etc is 'App'
>>>>
>>>> Paul
>>>>
>>>> my original draft reply:
>>>>
>>>> Mondays...
>>>>
>>>> Let's fix everything <sigh>
>>>>
>>>> I'm not against this change, but
>>>> would like to throw in a note of
>>>> caution:
>>>>
>>>> 1. I don't think OpenShift are
>>>> really pushing the term apps. Sure,
>>>> there's a command, and even some
>>>> doc references
>>>> (https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-us/openshift_enterprise/3.2/html/installation_and_configuration/install-config-imagestreams-templates#creating-instantapp-templates
>>>> <https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-us/openshift_enterprise/3.2/html/installation_and_configuration/install-config-imagestreams-templates#creating-instantapp-templates>),
>>>> but would like to check with them
>>>> before assuming that's deliberate.
>>>> In my mind, their term of choice is
>>>> Application, a bit more of an
>>>> enterprisey term.
>>>>
>>>> 2. Does "Mobile Clients" solve a
>>>> problem? we already have a
>>>> generation of ppl saying "there's
>>>> an app for that", do we want to
>>>> embrace that or swim upstream? what
>>>> about when there's a web ui to
>>>> something, we used to bundle mobile
>>>> and web into the term 'client app'.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 11/27/2017 11:03 AM, Jason
>>>> Madigan wrote:
>>>>> Deep thoughts this early in the
>>>>> week. App is quite a loaded term
>>>>> alright, particularly in an
>>>>> OpenShift context, so I think
>>>>> Mobile Client may be a clearer
>>>>> distinction.
>>>>>
>>>>> Looping in our wordsmith Paul who
>>>>> may have other ideas.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 9:44 AM,
>>>>> Craig Brookes <cbrookes at redhat.com
>>>>> <mailto:cbrookes at redhat.com>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Was thinking about terminology
>>>>> . We have been using the term
>>>>> mobile app, but I wonder would
>>>>> it be clearer to use the term
>>>>> mobile client instead.
>>>>> The main reason for this is
>>>>> that app can mean a server
>>>>> side component (in OpenShift
>>>>> there is the new-app command
>>>>> for example). I think it would
>>>>> make a clearer distinction.
>>>>> Another example is around the
>>>>> word build. When you do an app
>>>>> build in OpenShift it normally
>>>>> produces a docker image and a
>>>>> running server / app. I think
>>>>> using the the term mobile
>>>>> client build makes it clearer
>>>>> what is happening.
>>>>>
>>>>> Just a thought for a Monday
>>>>> morning.
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Craig Brookes
>>>>> RHMAP
>>>>> @maleck13 Github
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> feedhenry-dev mailing list
>>>>> feedhenry-dev at redhat.com
>>>>> <mailto:feedhenry-dev at redhat.com>
>>>>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/feedhenry-dev
>>>>> <https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/feedhenry-dev>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Jason Madigan
>>>>> Engineering Manager, Red Hat Mobile
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Craig Brookes
>>>> RHMAP
>>>> @maleck13 Github
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> feedhenry-dev mailing list
>>> feedhenry-dev at redhat.com
>>> <mailto:feedhenry-dev at redhat.com>
>>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/feedhenry-dev
>>> <https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/feedhenry-dev>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> David Martin
>>> Red Hat Mobile
>>> Twitter: @irldavem
>>> IRC: @irldavem (feedhenry, mobile-internal)
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> feedhenry-dev mailing list
>>> feedhenry-dev at redhat.com
>>> <mailto:feedhenry-dev at redhat.com>
>>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/feedhenry-dev
>>> <https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/feedhenry-dev>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Project lead AeroGear.org
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Project lead AeroGear.org
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> feedhenry-dev mailing list
>> feedhenry-dev at redhat.com
>> <mailto:feedhenry-dev at redhat.com>
>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/feedhenry-dev
>> <https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/feedhenry-dev>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Project lead AeroGear.org
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> feedhenry-dev mailing list
>> feedhenry-dev at redhat.com <mailto:feedhenry-dev at redhat.com>
>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/feedhenry-dev
>> <https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/feedhenry-dev>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> David Martin
>> Red Hat Mobile
>> Twitter: @irldavem
>> IRC: @irldavem (feedhenry, mobile-internal)
>
>
>
>
> --
> Project lead AeroGear.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/feedhenry-dev/attachments/20171213/98f3fe35/attachment.htm>
More information about the feedhenry-dev
mailing list