[feedhenry-dev] mobile client or mobile app

Thu Nov 30 11:48:09 UTC 2017

On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 12:05 PM, Paul Wright <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>
> 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/inde
>> x/#_useful_terminology
>>
>> On 29 November 2017 at 09:42, Paul Wright <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>
>>> 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_ent
>>>> erprise/3.2/html/installation_and_configuration/install-conf
>>>> ig-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>
>>>> 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
>>>>> 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
>>> 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
>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/feedhenry-dev
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Project lead AeroGear.org
>
>
>

-- 
Project lead AeroGear.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/feedhenry-dev/attachments/20171130/303045f2/attachment.htm>