Maybe case 2 below should be, Onpush [default every n mins]
Where the polling default is optional and will be done on hub-failure only if specified. Imtiaz Imtiaz Imtiaz Ahmed H E Cell +91.98452 84561 Bangalore, India -----Original Message----- From: "Imtiaz Ahmed H E" <[email protected]> Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2010 08:21:13 To: <[email protected]> Subject: Re: ESME-170 - PubSubHubub However, If a feed PuSHes too often Esme may be inundated with messages. So, instead of what Ethan concurs with below, should the user have the option to poll 'every 5 mins' or so even if the feed supports PuSH ? Also, a feed may support PuSH but the hub may breakdown. In that case should the user be reverted to say, a default of, 'every 5 mins' ? Maybe we should have two kinds of filter tests. 1. every n mins 2. onpush default every n mins PubSubHubub will be used only in 2 above, reverting to every n mins if the feed's hub breaks down (fails).. In 1 above, only polling will be done even if the feed supports PuSH. Let me know if this sounds okay... Imtiaz ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ethan Jewett" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, August 18, 2010 10:05 PM Subject: Re: ESME-170 - PubSubHubub > Hi Imtiaz, > > I completely agree. If we need to revamp the filter syntax to make > this more clear, we can do that after the PuSH functionality is > already in place. > > Thanks! > Ethan > > On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 7:38 AM, Imtiaz Ahmed H E <[email protected]> > wrote: >> Ethan, >> >> After some initial thoughts otherwise about this, I now feel, for an >> RSS/ATOM feed that PuSHes ( PuSH is an acronym for PubSubHubub) we should >> just ignore any test (filter) whatsoever and update the user's messages >> whenever a feed update is PuSHed to ESME. >> >> Let me know if otherwise... >> >> Imtiaz >> >> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Imtiaz Ahmed H E" >> <[email protected]> >> To: <[email protected]> >> Sent: Tuesday, August 17, 2010 12:20 PM >> Subject: Re: ESME-170 - PubSubHubub >> >> >>> Well, I need to know all the possible kinds of tests (filters >>> conditions) >>> that make sense for an RSS/ATOM action. >>> >>> Imtiaz >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Vassil Dichev" <[email protected]> >>> To: <[email protected]> >>> Sent: Tuesday, August 17, 2010 8:19 AM >>> Subject: Re: ESME-170 - PubSubHubub >>> >>> >>> It's the kind of filter condition which makes the best sense for this >>> action, at least. What do you want to do? >>> >>> Vassil >>> >>> >>> On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 5:30 AM, Imtiaz Ahmed H E <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Probably can figure this out, but would someone oblige and tell me... >>>> >>>> Is >>>> >>>> every nn mins rss-url >>>> >>>> the only form/kind of an rss/atom based action ? >>>> >>>> Thanks >>>> Imtiaz >>>> >>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ethan Jewett" <[email protected]> >>>> To: <[email protected]> >>>> Sent: Monday, August 16, 2010 4:55 PM >>>> Subject: Re: ESME-170 - PubSubHubub >>>> >>>> >>>>> Yes, several. You can either work on that branch directly, or start >>>>> over by submitting a patch with a different branch created (or I can >>>>> create one for you - just let me know the name you want). Create a >>>>> branch locally by using the instructions at >>>>> http://svnbook.red-bean.com/en/1.1/ch04s02.html >>>>> >>>>> Because the branch has gotten out of sync with trunk, it is difficult >>>>> to diff the branch. If you want to see a diff between the branch and >>>>> trunk you can do (I kid you not): >>>>> >>>>> svn diff -r985659:980193 >>>>> >>>>> That actually gives a diff between those two revisions, so as soon as >>>>> someone makes a new commit to either trunk or the branch it will no >>>>> longer be valid. To find out what revision a branch is currently on, >>>>> you go into the main directory of that branch and run (or so I read on >>>>> the internet): >>>>> >>>>> svn log --limit 1 >>>>> >>>>> The more manual option, but the option I prefer, is to browse >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/esme/branches/tagandconversationfollow/ >>>>> Based on the log entires, you can see which files I changed, and the >>>>> tool will show you the change history since the branch with diffs, so >>>>> you can see fairly easily what was changed. >>>>> >>>>> Ethan >>>>> >>>>> On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 12:18 AM, Imtiaz Ahmed H E >>>>> <[email protected]> >>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Ethan, >>>>>> >>>>>> Okay. >>>>>> >>>>>> Need to know:- >>>>>> >>>>>> Have you committed any changes to the pubsubhubub branch i.e., >>>>>> different >>>>>> from what is in trunk ? >>>>>> >>>>>> Imtiaz >>>>>> >>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ethan Jewett" >>>>>> <[email protected]> >>>>>> To: <[email protected]> >>>>>> Sent: Monday, August 16, 2010 1:01 AM >>>>>> Subject: Re: ESME-170 - PubSubHubub >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Feel free to assign to yourself. You can find my small progress in >>>>>> the >>>>>> pubsubhubbub branch in svn. As you can see, I had not gotten far, so >>>>>> if you can move it along that'd be great. >>>>>> >>>>>> If you have interim patches of your work on the branch, just post it >>>>>> to jira and email the lists. I'll try to apply them right away. >>>>>> >>>>>> Ethan >>>>>> >>>>>> On Sunday, August 15, 2010, Imtiaz Ahmed H E <[email protected]> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Ethan, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> This is currently assigned to you. I thought I'll assign this to >>>>>>> myself >>>>>>> and work on it right away... >>>>>>> >>>>>>> What do you say, if you aren't working on it ? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I've been looking up the PubSubHubub stuff pointed to by Dick in the >>>>>>> Jira. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The other possibility for me for the release is the >>>>>>> container-based-authentication stuff which Dick said recently in a >>>>>>> mail >>>>>>> from >>>>>>> his vacation will need his spec'ing out on his return which is of >>>>>>> course >>>>>>> any >>>>>>> day now but the spec will take a few days from today... >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Imtiaz >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >> >>
