Re: [Dev] Shall we use latest APPM in EMM?

[Lakshman Udayakantha]

Hi Sajith,

Added some comments and fixes in code. can you have a look?

Thanks

On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 8:45 PM, Sajith Abeywardhana 
wrote:

> Hi Lakshman,
>
> I reviewed some files in PR https://github.com/wso2/carbon-appmgt/pull/250 and
> add some comments. Please have a look.
>
> Thanks,
> Sajith.
>
> On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 7:33 PM, Lakshman Udayakantha 
> wrote:
>
>> Hi APPM Team, EMM Team,
>>
>> I have created following pull requests [1], [2] and [3] for latest APPM
>> and EMM integration. Could you review and merge them?
>>
>> [1] https://github.com/wso2/carbon-appmgt/pull/250
>> [2] https://github.com/wso2/product-emm/pull/203
>> [3] https://github.com/wso2/carbon-device-mgt/pull/208/
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 6:02 PM, Lakshman Udayakantha > > wrote:
>>
>>> Hi All,
>>>
>>> After I have merged the APPM latest version and configuration changes
>>> from APPM to EMM and after the above code changes, publisher and store can
>>> be browsed and publish apps without any issue. But app installing on
>>> devices failed because the code which handles that part are moved to an
>>> APPM old branch(which is currently using in EMM) from EMM. So I
>>> cherry-picked those specific commits from that old branch to master branch
>>> in APPM. After that app installing on devices worked without any issue. But
>>> product app manager P2 profile generation failed with below error messages.
>>>
>>>  Software being installed: WSO2 Carbon - App Manager WSO2 MDM Feature
>>> 1.1.3.SNAPSHOT (org.wso2.carbon.appmgt.mdm.wso2mdm.feature.group
>>> 1.1.3.SNAPSHOT)
>>>  Missing requirement: org.wso2.carbon.appmgt.mdm.wso2mdm 1.1.3.SNAPSHOT
>>> (org.wso2.carbon.appmgt.mdm.wso2mdm 1.1.3.SNAPSHOT) requires 'package
>>> org.wso2.carbon.device.mgt.core.app.mgt 0.0.0' but it could not be found
>>>
>>> According to the error, It seems like we have to bundle carbon device
>>> features and lot of other features which depend on it with APPM product
>>> which is not actually used in APPM.
>>>
>>> According to the offline discussion with PrabathA, DinushaS, RuwanA, It
>>> was proposed to keep the code handled which handled app installing on
>>> devices in APPM as a separate independent feature, but not bundled with
>>> APPM product rather it bundled with EMM product.
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 4:59 PM, Dinusha Senanayaka 
>>> wrote:
>>>


 On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 4:42 PM, Lakshman Udayakantha <
 lakshm...@wso2.com> wrote:

> Hi Dinusha,
>
> Updated the pull with your suggestions.
>
 Thanks. Merged.

>
> Thanks
>
> On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 2:57 PM, Dinusha Senanayaka 
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Lakshman,
>>
>> Thanks for fixing this. Added few comments to PR. Please update.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Dinusha.
>>
>> On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 2:40 PM, Lakshman Udayakantha <
>> lakshm...@wso2.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Dinusha,
>>>
>>> I have moved subscriber persisting code [1] to subscription creation
>>> moment from login moment. Could you review and merge it.
>>>
>>> [1] https://github.com/wso2/carbon-appmgt/pull/245/files
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 9:30 PM, Dinusha Senanayaka <
>>> dinu...@wso2.com> wrote:
>>>
 Hi All,

 This is something we got from the APIM code and we need to refactor
 it. In their case, users login to store can create oauth app and 
 subscribe
 to APIs. App creation also should be done by a subscriber and that's 
 why
 user is added to SUBSCRIBER table at the login. Then SUBSCRIPTION 
 table is
 populate when the actual subscription happen to API.

 Anyway, AppM do not have this app creation concept in the store.
 Hence we could move this SUBSCRIBER, SUBSCRIPTION both table inserts to
 where actual subscription happens.

 Regards,
 Dinusha.

 On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 8:33 PM, Lahiru Cooray 
 wrote:

> +1 for Ruwan's suggestion.
> Further in current model, Subscriptions(APM_SUBSCRIPTION) are
> mapped to a Application(APM_APPLICATION) and Application is bound to a
> subscriber (APM_SUBSCRIBER)
>
> Subscriber should ideally contain the users who are subscribed to
> an App.
> But currently APM_SUBSCRIBER table getting updated when an user
> log in to the store (which is not ideal)
> This operation should be moved to just before user get subscribed
> to an App.
>
>
> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 5:12 PM, Ruwan Abeykoon 
> wrote:
>
>> Hi All,
>> I think APM_SUBSCRIBER is used to check subscription on 

Re: [Dev] Shall we use latest APPM in EMM?

[Sajith Abeywardhana]

Hi Lakshman,

I reviewed some files in PR https://github.com/wso2/carbon-appmgt/pull/250 and
add some comments. Please have a look.

Thanks,
Sajith.

On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 7:33 PM, Lakshman Udayakantha 
wrote:

> Hi APPM Team, EMM Team,
>
> I have created following pull requests [1], [2] and [3] for latest APPM
> and EMM integration. Could you review and merge them?
>
> [1] https://github.com/wso2/carbon-appmgt/pull/250
> [2] https://github.com/wso2/product-emm/pull/203
> [3] https://github.com/wso2/carbon-device-mgt/pull/208/
>
> Thanks
>
> On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 6:02 PM, Lakshman Udayakantha 
> wrote:
>
>> Hi All,
>>
>> After I have merged the APPM latest version and configuration changes
>> from APPM to EMM and after the above code changes, publisher and store can
>> be browsed and publish apps without any issue. But app installing on
>> devices failed because the code which handles that part are moved to an
>> APPM old branch(which is currently using in EMM) from EMM. So I
>> cherry-picked those specific commits from that old branch to master branch
>> in APPM. After that app installing on devices worked without any issue. But
>> product app manager P2 profile generation failed with below error messages.
>>
>>  Software being installed: WSO2 Carbon - App Manager WSO2 MDM Feature
>> 1.1.3.SNAPSHOT (org.wso2.carbon.appmgt.mdm.wso2mdm.feature.group
>> 1.1.3.SNAPSHOT)
>>  Missing requirement: org.wso2.carbon.appmgt.mdm.wso2mdm 1.1.3.SNAPSHOT
>> (org.wso2.carbon.appmgt.mdm.wso2mdm 1.1.3.SNAPSHOT) requires 'package
>> org.wso2.carbon.device.mgt.core.app.mgt 0.0.0' but it could not be found
>>
>> According to the error, It seems like we have to bundle carbon device
>> features and lot of other features which depend on it with APPM product
>> which is not actually used in APPM.
>>
>> According to the offline discussion with PrabathA, DinushaS, RuwanA, It
>> was proposed to keep the code handled which handled app installing on
>> devices in APPM as a separate independent feature, but not bundled with
>> APPM product rather it bundled with EMM product.
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 4:59 PM, Dinusha Senanayaka 
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 4:42 PM, Lakshman Udayakantha <
>>> lakshm...@wso2.com> wrote:
>>>
 Hi Dinusha,

 Updated the pull with your suggestions.

>>> Thanks. Merged.
>>>

 Thanks

 On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 2:57 PM, Dinusha Senanayaka 
 wrote:

> Hi Lakshman,
>
> Thanks for fixing this. Added few comments to PR. Please update.
>
> Regards,
> Dinusha.
>
> On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 2:40 PM, Lakshman Udayakantha <
> lakshm...@wso2.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Dinusha,
>>
>> I have moved subscriber persisting code [1] to subscription creation
>> moment from login moment. Could you review and merge it.
>>
>> [1] https://github.com/wso2/carbon-appmgt/pull/245/files
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 9:30 PM, Dinusha Senanayaka > > wrote:
>>
>>> Hi All,
>>>
>>> This is something we got from the APIM code and we need to refactor
>>> it. In their case, users login to store can create oauth app and 
>>> subscribe
>>> to APIs. App creation also should be done by a subscriber and that's why
>>> user is added to SUBSCRIBER table at the login. Then SUBSCRIPTION table 
>>> is
>>> populate when the actual subscription happen to API.
>>>
>>> Anyway, AppM do not have this app creation concept in the store.
>>> Hence we could move this SUBSCRIBER, SUBSCRIPTION both table inserts to
>>> where actual subscription happens.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Dinusha.
>>>
>>> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 8:33 PM, Lahiru Cooray 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 +1 for Ruwan's suggestion.
 Further in current model, Subscriptions(APM_SUBSCRIPTION) are
 mapped to a Application(APM_APPLICATION) and Application is bound to a
 subscriber (APM_SUBSCRIBER)

 Subscriber should ideally contain the users who are subscribed to
 an App.
 But currently APM_SUBSCRIBER table getting updated when an user log
 in to the store (which is not ideal)
 This operation should be moved to just before user get subscribed
 to an App.


 On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 5:12 PM, Ruwan Abeykoon 
 wrote:

> Hi All,
> I think APM_SUBSCRIBER is used to check subscription on WebApps
> or Sites.
> I think adding subscriber to this table can be moved to place
> where the subscription is added. We might have to revisit and change 
> the
> SQL queries which is used to check the subscriptions.
>
> Cheers,
> Ruwan
>

Re: [Dev] Shall we use latest APPM in EMM?

[Lakshman Udayakantha]

Hi APPM Team, EMM Team,

I have created following pull requests [1], [2] and [3] for latest APPM and
EMM integration. Could you review and merge them?

[1] https://github.com/wso2/carbon-appmgt/pull/250
[2] https://github.com/wso2/product-emm/pull/203
[3] https://github.com/wso2/carbon-device-mgt/pull/208/

Thanks

On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 6:02 PM, Lakshman Udayakantha 
wrote:

> Hi All,
>
> After I have merged the APPM latest version and configuration changes from
> APPM to EMM and after the above code changes, publisher and store can be
> browsed and publish apps without any issue. But app installing on devices
> failed because the code which handles that part are moved to an APPM old
> branch(which is currently using in EMM) from EMM. So I cherry-picked those
> specific commits from that old branch to master branch in APPM. After that
> app installing on devices worked without any issue. But product app manager
> P2 profile generation failed with below error messages.
>
>  Software being installed: WSO2 Carbon - App Manager WSO2 MDM Feature
> 1.1.3.SNAPSHOT (org.wso2.carbon.appmgt.mdm.wso2mdm.feature.group
> 1.1.3.SNAPSHOT)
>  Missing requirement: org.wso2.carbon.appmgt.mdm.wso2mdm 1.1.3.SNAPSHOT
> (org.wso2.carbon.appmgt.mdm.wso2mdm 1.1.3.SNAPSHOT) requires 'package
> org.wso2.carbon.device.mgt.core.app.mgt 0.0.0' but it could not be found
>
> According to the error, It seems like we have to bundle carbon device
> features and lot of other features which depend on it with APPM product
> which is not actually used in APPM.
>
> According to the offline discussion with PrabathA, DinushaS, RuwanA, It
> was proposed to keep the code handled which handled app installing on
> devices in APPM as a separate independent feature, but not bundled with
> APPM product rather it bundled with EMM product.
>
> Thanks
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 4:59 PM, Dinusha Senanayaka 
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 4:42 PM, Lakshman Udayakantha > > wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Dinusha,
>>>
>>> Updated the pull with your suggestions.
>>>
>> Thanks. Merged.
>>
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>>
>>> On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 2:57 PM, Dinusha Senanayaka 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 Hi Lakshman,

 Thanks for fixing this. Added few comments to PR. Please update.

 Regards,
 Dinusha.

 On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 2:40 PM, Lakshman Udayakantha <
 lakshm...@wso2.com> wrote:

> Hi Dinusha,
>
> I have moved subscriber persisting code [1] to subscription creation
> moment from login moment. Could you review and merge it.
>
> [1] https://github.com/wso2/carbon-appmgt/pull/245/files
>
> Thanks
>
>
> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 9:30 PM, Dinusha Senanayaka 
> wrote:
>
>> Hi All,
>>
>> This is something we got from the APIM code and we need to refactor
>> it. In their case, users login to store can create oauth app and 
>> subscribe
>> to APIs. App creation also should be done by a subscriber and that's why
>> user is added to SUBSCRIBER table at the login. Then SUBSCRIPTION table 
>> is
>> populate when the actual subscription happen to API.
>>
>> Anyway, AppM do not have this app creation concept in the store.
>> Hence we could move this SUBSCRIBER, SUBSCRIPTION both table inserts to
>> where actual subscription happens.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Dinusha.
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 8:33 PM, Lahiru Cooray 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> +1 for Ruwan's suggestion.
>>> Further in current model, Subscriptions(APM_SUBSCRIPTION) are mapped
>>> to a Application(APM_APPLICATION) and Application is bound to a 
>>> subscriber
>>> (APM_SUBSCRIBER)
>>>
>>> Subscriber should ideally contain the users who are subscribed to an
>>> App.
>>> But currently APM_SUBSCRIBER table getting updated when an user log
>>> in to the store (which is not ideal)
>>> This operation should be moved to just before user get subscribed to
>>> an App.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 5:12 PM, Ruwan Abeykoon 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 Hi All,
 I think APM_SUBSCRIBER is used to check subscription on WebApps or
 Sites.
 I think adding subscriber to this table can be moved to place where
 the subscription is added. We might have to revisit and change the SQL
 queries which is used to check the subscriptions.

 Cheers,
 Ruwan

 On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 4:49 PM, Lakshman Udayakantha <
 lakshm...@wso2.com> wrote:

> Hi Dinusha,
>
> When user is going to login to store, user will add if does not
> exist, to a table called APM_SUBSCRIBER . This code snippet has 
> removed in
> EMM store (in APPM 1.1.1 version). That's why earlier this 

Re: [Dev] Shall we use latest APPM in EMM?

[Lakshman Udayakantha]

Hi All,

After I have merged the APPM latest version and configuration changes from
APPM to EMM and after the above code changes, publisher and store can be
browsed and publish apps without any issue. But app installing on devices
failed because the code which handles that part are moved to an APPM old
branch(which is currently using in EMM) from EMM. So I cherry-picked those
specific commits from that old branch to master branch in APPM. After that
app installing on devices worked without any issue. But product app manager
P2 profile generation failed with below error messages.

 Software being installed: WSO2 Carbon - App Manager WSO2 MDM Feature
1.1.3.SNAPSHOT (org.wso2.carbon.appmgt.mdm.wso2mdm.feature.group
1.1.3.SNAPSHOT)
 Missing requirement: org.wso2.carbon.appmgt.mdm.wso2mdm 1.1.3.SNAPSHOT
(org.wso2.carbon.appmgt.mdm.wso2mdm 1.1.3.SNAPSHOT) requires 'package
org.wso2.carbon.device.mgt.core.app.mgt 0.0.0' but it could not be found

According to the error, It seems like we have to bundle carbon device
features and lot of other features which depend on it with APPM product
which is not actually used in APPM.

According to the offline discussion with PrabathA, DinushaS, RuwanA, It was
proposed to keep the code handled which handled app installing on devices
in APPM as a separate independent feature, but not bundled with APPM
product rather it bundled with EMM product.

Thanks


On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 4:59 PM, Dinusha Senanayaka 
wrote:

>
>
> On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 4:42 PM, Lakshman Udayakantha 
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Dinusha,
>>
>> Updated the pull with your suggestions.
>>
> Thanks. Merged.
>
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 2:57 PM, Dinusha Senanayaka 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Lakshman,
>>>
>>> Thanks for fixing this. Added few comments to PR. Please update.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Dinusha.
>>>
>>> On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 2:40 PM, Lakshman Udayakantha <
>>> lakshm...@wso2.com> wrote:
>>>
 Hi Dinusha,

 I have moved subscriber persisting code [1] to subscription creation
 moment from login moment. Could you review and merge it.

 [1] https://github.com/wso2/carbon-appmgt/pull/245/files

 Thanks


 On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 9:30 PM, Dinusha Senanayaka 
 wrote:

> Hi All,
>
> This is something we got from the APIM code and we need to refactor
> it. In their case, users login to store can create oauth app and subscribe
> to APIs. App creation also should be done by a subscriber and that's why
> user is added to SUBSCRIBER table at the login. Then SUBSCRIPTION table is
> populate when the actual subscription happen to API.
>
> Anyway, AppM do not have this app creation concept in the store. Hence
> we could move this SUBSCRIBER, SUBSCRIPTION both table inserts to where
> actual subscription happens.
>
> Regards,
> Dinusha.
>
> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 8:33 PM, Lahiru Cooray 
> wrote:
>
>> +1 for Ruwan's suggestion.
>> Further in current model, Subscriptions(APM_SUBSCRIPTION) are mapped
>> to a Application(APM_APPLICATION) and Application is bound to a 
>> subscriber
>> (APM_SUBSCRIBER)
>>
>> Subscriber should ideally contain the users who are subscribed to an
>> App.
>> But currently APM_SUBSCRIBER table getting updated when an user log
>> in to the store (which is not ideal)
>> This operation should be moved to just before user get subscribed to
>> an App.
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 5:12 PM, Ruwan Abeykoon 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi All,
>>> I think APM_SUBSCRIBER is used to check subscription on WebApps or
>>> Sites.
>>> I think adding subscriber to this table can be moved to place where
>>> the subscription is added. We might have to revisit and change the SQL
>>> queries which is used to check the subscriptions.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Ruwan
>>>
>>> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 4:49 PM, Lakshman Udayakantha <
>>> lakshm...@wso2.com> wrote:
>>>
 Hi Dinusha,

 When user is going to login to store, user will add if does not
 exist, to a table called APM_SUBSCRIBER . This code snippet has 
 removed in
 EMM store (in APPM 1.1.1 version). That's why earlier this problem is 
 not
 raised. Anyway what is the purpose of adding user to the APM_SUBSCRIBER
 table? Note that this table is the only dependant table from APPM to 
 EMM.

 Thanks

 On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 3:01 PM, Prabath Abeysekera <
 praba...@wso2.com> wrote:

> Hi Dinusha,
>
> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 2:54 PM, Dinusha Senanayaka <
> dinu...@wso2.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Prabath,
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 2:34 PM, Prabath 

Re: [Dev] Shall we use latest APPM in EMM?

[Dinusha Senanayaka]

On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 4:42 PM, Lakshman Udayakantha 
wrote:

> Hi Dinusha,
>
> Updated the pull with your suggestions.
>
Thanks. Merged.

>
> Thanks
>
> On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 2:57 PM, Dinusha Senanayaka 
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Lakshman,
>>
>> Thanks for fixing this. Added few comments to PR. Please update.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Dinusha.
>>
>> On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 2:40 PM, Lakshman Udayakantha > > wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Dinusha,
>>>
>>> I have moved subscriber persisting code [1] to subscription creation
>>> moment from login moment. Could you review and merge it.
>>>
>>> [1] https://github.com/wso2/carbon-appmgt/pull/245/files
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 9:30 PM, Dinusha Senanayaka 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 Hi All,

 This is something we got from the APIM code and we need to refactor it.
 In their case, users login to store can create oauth app and subscribe to
 APIs. App creation also should be done by a subscriber and that's why user
 is added to SUBSCRIBER table at the login. Then SUBSCRIPTION table is
 populate when the actual subscription happen to API.

 Anyway, AppM do not have this app creation concept in the store. Hence
 we could move this SUBSCRIBER, SUBSCRIPTION both table inserts to where
 actual subscription happens.

 Regards,
 Dinusha.

 On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 8:33 PM, Lahiru Cooray 
 wrote:

> +1 for Ruwan's suggestion.
> Further in current model, Subscriptions(APM_SUBSCRIPTION) are mapped
> to a Application(APM_APPLICATION) and Application is bound to a subscriber
> (APM_SUBSCRIBER)
>
> Subscriber should ideally contain the users who are subscribed to an
> App.
> But currently APM_SUBSCRIBER table getting updated when an user log in
> to the store (which is not ideal)
> This operation should be moved to just before user get subscribed to
> an App.
>
>
> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 5:12 PM, Ruwan Abeykoon 
> wrote:
>
>> Hi All,
>> I think APM_SUBSCRIBER is used to check subscription on WebApps or
>> Sites.
>> I think adding subscriber to this table can be moved to place where
>> the subscription is added. We might have to revisit and change the SQL
>> queries which is used to check the subscriptions.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Ruwan
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 4:49 PM, Lakshman Udayakantha <
>> lakshm...@wso2.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Dinusha,
>>>
>>> When user is going to login to store, user will add if does not
>>> exist, to a table called APM_SUBSCRIBER . This code snippet has removed 
>>> in
>>> EMM store (in APPM 1.1.1 version). That's why earlier this problem is 
>>> not
>>> raised. Anyway what is the purpose of adding user to the APM_SUBSCRIBER
>>> table? Note that this table is the only dependant table from APPM to 
>>> EMM.
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>>
>>> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 3:01 PM, Prabath Abeysekera <
>>> praba...@wso2.com> wrote:
>>>
 Hi Dinusha,

 On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 2:54 PM, Dinusha Senanayaka <
 dinu...@wso2.com> wrote:

> Hi Prabath,
>
> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 2:34 PM, Prabath Abeysekera <
> praba...@wso2.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Dinusha,
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 2:19 PM, Dinusha Senanayaka <
>> dinu...@wso2.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Lakshman,
>>>
>>> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 2:08 PM, Lakshman Udayakantha <
>>> lakshm...@wso2.com> wrote:
>>>
 Hi,

 I am looking into this. After changing the APP Manager feature
 versions in EMM, publisher works as expected. It can create and 
 publish
 mobile apps without any issue. But I can't even login to store. 
 According
 to backend error, It seems like EMM wants APP Manager related db 
 tables
 too. I have added APP Manager tables to AM datasource and after 
 that I can
 login to store without any issue and published apps also shown in 
 there.
 Anyway is that ok to add APP Manager tables to AM datasource?

>>>
>>> I think it should be fine to include AppM datasource in EMM.
>>> Currently we don't need it for mobile apps. But there could be 
>>> scenarios in
>>> future we need AppM db for mobile apps as well.
>>>
>>
>> If "mobile application provisioning plugin" doesn't require
>> persisting information, why exactly do we need to add tables, etc 
>> just to
>> get the store to work?
>>
>
> This we need to check. AFAIK, EMM is installing only 

Re: [Dev] Shall we use latest APPM in EMM?

[Lakshman Udayakantha]

Hi Dinusha,

Updated the pull with your suggestions.

Thanks

On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 2:57 PM, Dinusha Senanayaka 
wrote:

> Hi Lakshman,
>
> Thanks for fixing this. Added few comments to PR. Please update.
>
> Regards,
> Dinusha.
>
> On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 2:40 PM, Lakshman Udayakantha 
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Dinusha,
>>
>> I have moved subscriber persisting code [1] to subscription creation
>> moment from login moment. Could you review and merge it.
>>
>> [1] https://github.com/wso2/carbon-appmgt/pull/245/files
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 9:30 PM, Dinusha Senanayaka 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi All,
>>>
>>> This is something we got from the APIM code and we need to refactor it.
>>> In their case, users login to store can create oauth app and subscribe to
>>> APIs. App creation also should be done by a subscriber and that's why user
>>> is added to SUBSCRIBER table at the login. Then SUBSCRIPTION table is
>>> populate when the actual subscription happen to API.
>>>
>>> Anyway, AppM do not have this app creation concept in the store. Hence
>>> we could move this SUBSCRIBER, SUBSCRIPTION both table inserts to where
>>> actual subscription happens.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Dinusha.
>>>
>>> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 8:33 PM, Lahiru Cooray  wrote:
>>>
 +1 for Ruwan's suggestion.
 Further in current model, Subscriptions(APM_SUBSCRIPTION) are mapped to
 a Application(APM_APPLICATION) and Application is bound to a subscriber
 (APM_SUBSCRIBER)

 Subscriber should ideally contain the users who are subscribed to an
 App.
 But currently APM_SUBSCRIBER table getting updated when an user log in
 to the store (which is not ideal)
 This operation should be moved to just before user get subscribed to an
 App.


 On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 5:12 PM, Ruwan Abeykoon 
 wrote:

> Hi All,
> I think APM_SUBSCRIBER is used to check subscription on WebApps or
> Sites.
> I think adding subscriber to this table can be moved to place where
> the subscription is added. We might have to revisit and change the SQL
> queries which is used to check the subscriptions.
>
> Cheers,
> Ruwan
>
> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 4:49 PM, Lakshman Udayakantha <
> lakshm...@wso2.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Dinusha,
>>
>> When user is going to login to store, user will add if does not
>> exist, to a table called APM_SUBSCRIBER . This code snippet has removed 
>> in
>> EMM store (in APPM 1.1.1 version). That's why earlier this problem is not
>> raised. Anyway what is the purpose of adding user to the APM_SUBSCRIBER
>> table? Note that this table is the only dependant table from APPM to EMM.
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 3:01 PM, Prabath Abeysekera <
>> praba...@wso2.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Dinusha,
>>>
>>> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 2:54 PM, Dinusha Senanayaka <
>>> dinu...@wso2.com> wrote:
>>>
 Hi Prabath,

 On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 2:34 PM, Prabath Abeysekera <
 praba...@wso2.com> wrote:

> Hi Dinusha,
>
> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 2:19 PM, Dinusha Senanayaka <
> dinu...@wso2.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Lakshman,
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 2:08 PM, Lakshman Udayakantha <
>> lakshm...@wso2.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I am looking into this. After changing the APP Manager feature
>>> versions in EMM, publisher works as expected. It can create and 
>>> publish
>>> mobile apps without any issue. But I can't even login to store. 
>>> According
>>> to backend error, It seems like EMM wants APP Manager related db 
>>> tables
>>> too. I have added APP Manager tables to AM datasource and after 
>>> that I can
>>> login to store without any issue and published apps also shown in 
>>> there.
>>> Anyway is that ok to add APP Manager tables to AM datasource?
>>>
>>
>> I think it should be fine to include AppM datasource in EMM.
>> Currently we don't need it for mobile apps. But there could be 
>> scenarios in
>> future we need AppM db for mobile apps as well.
>>
>
> If "mobile application provisioning plugin" doesn't require
> persisting information, why exactly do we need to add tables, etc 
> just to
> get the store to work?
>

 This we need to check. AFAIK, EMM is installing only appm.store,
 appm.publisher, appm.mobile features which is not depend on appm.core
 feature which provides the db. May be we have installed additional 
 feature ?

>>>
>>> That can possibly be the case. Thanks for the insight.
>>>

Re: [Dev] Shall we use latest APPM in EMM?

[Dinusha Senanayaka]

Hi Lakshman,

Thanks for fixing this. Added few comments to PR. Please update.

Regards,
Dinusha.

On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 2:40 PM, Lakshman Udayakantha 
wrote:

> Hi Dinusha,
>
> I have moved subscriber persisting code [1] to subscription creation
> moment from login moment. Could you review and merge it.
>
> [1] https://github.com/wso2/carbon-appmgt/pull/245/files
>
> Thanks
>
>
> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 9:30 PM, Dinusha Senanayaka 
> wrote:
>
>> Hi All,
>>
>> This is something we got from the APIM code and we need to refactor it.
>> In their case, users login to store can create oauth app and subscribe to
>> APIs. App creation also should be done by a subscriber and that's why user
>> is added to SUBSCRIBER table at the login. Then SUBSCRIPTION table is
>> populate when the actual subscription happen to API.
>>
>> Anyway, AppM do not have this app creation concept in the store. Hence we
>> could move this SUBSCRIBER, SUBSCRIPTION both table inserts to where actual
>> subscription happens.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Dinusha.
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 8:33 PM, Lahiru Cooray  wrote:
>>
>>> +1 for Ruwan's suggestion.
>>> Further in current model, Subscriptions(APM_SUBSCRIPTION) are mapped to
>>> a Application(APM_APPLICATION) and Application is bound to a subscriber
>>> (APM_SUBSCRIBER)
>>>
>>> Subscriber should ideally contain the users who are subscribed to an
>>> App.
>>> But currently APM_SUBSCRIBER table getting updated when an user log in
>>> to the store (which is not ideal)
>>> This operation should be moved to just before user get subscribed to an
>>> App.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 5:12 PM, Ruwan Abeykoon  wrote:
>>>
 Hi All,
 I think APM_SUBSCRIBER is used to check subscription on WebApps or
 Sites.
 I think adding subscriber to this table can be moved to place where the
 subscription is added. We might have to revisit and change the SQL queries
 which is used to check the subscriptions.

 Cheers,
 Ruwan

 On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 4:49 PM, Lakshman Udayakantha <
 lakshm...@wso2.com> wrote:

> Hi Dinusha,
>
> When user is going to login to store, user will add if does not exist,
> to a table called APM_SUBSCRIBER . This code snippet has removed in EMM
> store (in APPM 1.1.1 version). That's why earlier this problem is not
> raised. Anyway what is the purpose of adding user to the APM_SUBSCRIBER
> table? Note that this table is the only dependant table from APPM to EMM.
>
> Thanks
>
> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 3:01 PM, Prabath Abeysekera  > wrote:
>
>> Hi Dinusha,
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 2:54 PM, Dinusha Senanayaka > > wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Prabath,
>>>
>>> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 2:34 PM, Prabath Abeysekera <
>>> praba...@wso2.com> wrote:
>>>
 Hi Dinusha,

 On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 2:19 PM, Dinusha Senanayaka <
 dinu...@wso2.com> wrote:

> Hi Lakshman,
>
> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 2:08 PM, Lakshman Udayakantha <
> lakshm...@wso2.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I am looking into this. After changing the APP Manager feature
>> versions in EMM, publisher works as expected. It can create and 
>> publish
>> mobile apps without any issue. But I can't even login to store. 
>> According
>> to backend error, It seems like EMM wants APP Manager related db 
>> tables
>> too. I have added APP Manager tables to AM datasource and after that 
>> I can
>> login to store without any issue and published apps also shown in 
>> there.
>> Anyway is that ok to add APP Manager tables to AM datasource?
>>
>
> I think it should be fine to include AppM datasource in EMM.
> Currently we don't need it for mobile apps. But there could be 
> scenarios in
> future we need AppM db for mobile apps as well.
>

 If "mobile application provisioning plugin" doesn't require
 persisting information, why exactly do we need to add tables, etc just 
 to
 get the store to work?

>>>
>>> This we need to check. AFAIK, EMM is installing only appm.store,
>>> appm.publisher, appm.mobile features which is not depend on appm.core
>>> feature which provides the db. May be we have installed additional 
>>> feature ?
>>>
>>
>> That can possibly be the case. Thanks for the insight.
>>
>> @Lakshman, would you be able to double check if this is what's
>> demanding us to install these persistent entities? If that's the case, we
>> might have to revisit the list of features we've put into p2-profile 
>> around
>> app-mgt functionalities.
>>
>> Cheers,

Re: [Dev] Shall we use latest APPM in EMM?

[Lakshman Udayakantha]

Hi Dinusha,

I have moved subscriber persisting code [1] to subscription creation moment
from login moment. Could you review and merge it.

[1] https://github.com/wso2/carbon-appmgt/pull/245/files

Thanks


On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 9:30 PM, Dinusha Senanayaka 
wrote:

> Hi All,
>
> This is something we got from the APIM code and we need to refactor it. In
> their case, users login to store can create oauth app and subscribe to
> APIs. App creation also should be done by a subscriber and that's why user
> is added to SUBSCRIBER table at the login. Then SUBSCRIPTION table is
> populate when the actual subscription happen to API.
>
> Anyway, AppM do not have this app creation concept in the store. Hence we
> could move this SUBSCRIBER, SUBSCRIPTION both table inserts to where actual
> subscription happens.
>
> Regards,
> Dinusha.
>
> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 8:33 PM, Lahiru Cooray  wrote:
>
>> +1 for Ruwan's suggestion.
>> Further in current model, Subscriptions(APM_SUBSCRIPTION) are mapped to a
>> Application(APM_APPLICATION) and Application is bound to a subscriber
>> (APM_SUBSCRIBER)
>>
>> Subscriber should ideally contain the users who are subscribed to an App.
>> But currently APM_SUBSCRIBER table getting updated when an user log in to
>> the store (which is not ideal)
>> This operation should be moved to just before user get subscribed to an
>> App.
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 5:12 PM, Ruwan Abeykoon  wrote:
>>
>>> Hi All,
>>> I think APM_SUBSCRIBER is used to check subscription on WebApps or
>>> Sites.
>>> I think adding subscriber to this table can be moved to place where the
>>> subscription is added. We might have to revisit and change the SQL queries
>>> which is used to check the subscriptions.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Ruwan
>>>
>>> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 4:49 PM, Lakshman Udayakantha <
>>> lakshm...@wso2.com> wrote:
>>>
 Hi Dinusha,

 When user is going to login to store, user will add if does not exist,
 to a table called APM_SUBSCRIBER . This code snippet has removed in EMM
 store (in APPM 1.1.1 version). That's why earlier this problem is not
 raised. Anyway what is the purpose of adding user to the APM_SUBSCRIBER
 table? Note that this table is the only dependant table from APPM to EMM.

 Thanks

 On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 3:01 PM, Prabath Abeysekera 
 wrote:

> Hi Dinusha,
>
> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 2:54 PM, Dinusha Senanayaka 
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Prabath,
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 2:34 PM, Prabath Abeysekera <
>> praba...@wso2.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Dinusha,
>>>
>>> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 2:19 PM, Dinusha Senanayaka <
>>> dinu...@wso2.com> wrote:
>>>
 Hi Lakshman,

 On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 2:08 PM, Lakshman Udayakantha <
 lakshm...@wso2.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I am looking into this. After changing the APP Manager feature
> versions in EMM, publisher works as expected. It can create and 
> publish
> mobile apps without any issue. But I can't even login to store. 
> According
> to backend error, It seems like EMM wants APP Manager related db 
> tables
> too. I have added APP Manager tables to AM datasource and after that 
> I can
> login to store without any issue and published apps also shown in 
> there.
> Anyway is that ok to add APP Manager tables to AM datasource?
>

 I think it should be fine to include AppM datasource in EMM.
 Currently we don't need it for mobile apps. But there could be 
 scenarios in
 future we need AppM db for mobile apps as well.

>>>
>>> If "mobile application provisioning plugin" doesn't require
>>> persisting information, why exactly do we need to add tables, etc just 
>>> to
>>> get the store to work?
>>>
>>
>> This we need to check. AFAIK, EMM is installing only appm.store,
>> appm.publisher, appm.mobile features which is not depend on appm.core
>> feature which provides the db. May be we have installed additional 
>> feature ?
>>
>
> That can possibly be the case. Thanks for the insight.
>
> @Lakshman, would you be able to double check if this is what's
> demanding us to install these persistent entities? If that's the case, we
> might have to revisit the list of features we've put into p2-profile 
> around
> app-mgt functionalities.
>
> Cheers,
> Prabath
>
>
>>
>> Regards,
>> Dinusha.
>>
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Prabath
>>>
>>>

 Regards,
 Dinusha.

>
> Thanks
>
> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 2:43 PM, Milan Perera 
> wrote:
>
>> 

Re: [Dev] Shall we use latest APPM in EMM?

[Chathura Dilan]

Hi All,

Currently mobile apps does not use any APPM related databases. It only uses
the registry. Subscriptions are stored in the registry.

On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 4:42 AM, Ruwan Abeykoon  wrote:

> Hi All,
> I think APM_SUBSCRIBER is used to check subscription on WebApps or Sites.
> I think adding subscriber to this table can be moved to place where the
> subscription is added. We might have to revisit and change the SQL queries
> which is used to check the subscriptions.
>
> Cheers,
> Ruwan
>
> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 4:49 PM, Lakshman Udayakantha 
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Dinusha,
>>
>> When user is going to login to store, user will add if does not exist, to
>> a table called APM_SUBSCRIBER . This code snippet has removed in EMM store
>> (in APPM 1.1.1 version). That's why earlier this problem is not raised.
>> Anyway what is the purpose of adding user to the APM_SUBSCRIBER table? Note
>> that this table is the only dependant table from APPM to EMM.
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 3:01 PM, Prabath Abeysekera 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Dinusha,
>>>
>>> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 2:54 PM, Dinusha Senanayaka 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 Hi Prabath,

 On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 2:34 PM, Prabath Abeysekera 
 wrote:

> Hi Dinusha,
>
> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 2:19 PM, Dinusha Senanayaka 
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Lakshman,
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 2:08 PM, Lakshman Udayakantha <
>> lakshm...@wso2.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I am looking into this. After changing the APP Manager feature
>>> versions in EMM, publisher works as expected. It can create and publish
>>> mobile apps without any issue. But I can't even login to store. 
>>> According
>>> to backend error, It seems like EMM wants APP Manager related db tables
>>> too. I have added APP Manager tables to AM datasource and after that I 
>>> can
>>> login to store without any issue and published apps also shown in there.
>>> Anyway is that ok to add APP Manager tables to AM datasource?
>>>
>>
>> I think it should be fine to include AppM datasource in EMM.
>> Currently we don't need it for mobile apps. But there could be scenarios 
>> in
>> future we need AppM db for mobile apps as well.
>>
>
> If "mobile application provisioning plugin" doesn't require persisting
> information, why exactly do we need to add tables, etc just to get the
> store to work?
>

 This we need to check. AFAIK, EMM is installing only appm.store,
 appm.publisher, appm.mobile features which is not depend on appm.core
 feature which provides the db. May be we have installed additional feature 
 ?

>>>
>>> That can possibly be the case. Thanks for the insight.
>>>
>>> @Lakshman, would you be able to double check if this is what's demanding
>>> us to install these persistent entities? If that's the case, we might have
>>> to revisit the list of features we've put into p2-profile around app-mgt
>>> functionalities.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Prabath
>>>
>>>

 Regards,
 Dinusha.

>
> Cheers,
> Prabath
>
>
>>
>> Regards,
>> Dinusha.
>>
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>>
>>> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 2:43 PM, Milan Perera 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 Hi Dinusha,

 I totally agree to what you said. Its better if we can do this as
 soon as possible.

 Regards,

 On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 2:31 PM, Dinusha Senanayaka <
 dinu...@wso2.com> wrote:

> Hi Milan,
>
> IMO, if we have version conflicts we should try to fix it. What we
> have done so far is not correct. We have created a separate branch of 
> AppM
> for EMM by manually removing the web app related UIs. We have done it 
> for
> the time being, but this won't scale when it comes to 
> support/maintenance
> and feature development. With the feature that Lakshman has done, we 
> could
> use the same code base for both AppM and EMM.
>
> Regards,
> Dinusha.
>
> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 2:11 PM, Milan Perera 
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Lakshman,
>>
>> As I remember, we have tried it before and in the previous
>> attempt of migrating to the latest APPM feature was failed due to 
>> some
>> conflicts in dependencies that were unable to resolve at that time. 
>> If im
>> not mistaken, it had conflicts with the IS version which we use in 
>> the EMM
>> 200.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 7:25 AM, Lakshman Udayakantha <
>> lakshm...@wso2.com> wrote:
>>

Re: [Dev] Shall we use latest APPM in EMM?

[Prabath Abeysekera]

Hi Dinusha,

On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 2:19 PM, Dinusha Senanayaka 
wrote:

> Hi Lakshman,
>
> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 2:08 PM, Lakshman Udayakantha 
> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I am looking into this. After changing the APP Manager feature versions
>> in EMM, publisher works as expected. It can create and publish mobile apps
>> without any issue. But I can't even login to store. According to backend
>> error, It seems like EMM wants APP Manager related db tables too. I have
>> added APP Manager tables to AM datasource and after that I can login to
>> store without any issue and published apps also shown in there. Anyway is
>> that ok to add APP Manager tables to AM datasource?
>>
>
> I think it should be fine to include AppM datasource in EMM. Currently we
> don't need it for mobile apps. But there could be scenarios in future we
> need AppM db for mobile apps as well.
>

If "mobile application provisioning plugin" doesn't require persisting
information, why exactly do we need to add tables, etc just to get the
store to work?

Cheers,
Prabath


>
> Regards,
> Dinusha.
>
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 2:43 PM, Milan Perera  wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Dinusha,
>>>
>>> I totally agree to what you said. Its better if we can do this as soon
>>> as possible.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 2:31 PM, Dinusha Senanayaka 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 Hi Milan,

 IMO, if we have version conflicts we should try to fix it. What we have
 done so far is not correct. We have created a separate branch of AppM for
 EMM by manually removing the web app related UIs. We have done it for the
 time being, but this won't scale when it comes to support/maintenance and
 feature development. With the feature that Lakshman has done, we could use
 the same code base for both AppM and EMM.

 Regards,
 Dinusha.

 On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 2:11 PM, Milan Perera  wrote:

> Hi Lakshman,
>
> As I remember, we have tried it before and in the previous attempt of
> migrating to the latest APPM feature was failed due to some conflicts in
> dependencies that were unable to resolve at that time. If im not mistaken,
> it had conflicts with the IS version which we use in the EMM 200.
>
> Regards,
>
> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 7:25 AM, Lakshman Udayakantha <
> lakshm...@wso2.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Chathura,
>>
>> Yes. It is not because of asset turning off/on feature. I meant that
>> UI has changed a lot in latest APP Manager recently and APPM team didn't
>> get much time to resolve all the bugs reported. As per the offline
>> discussion with LahiruC lot of mobile features has broken with new UI and
>> they are fixing it now. So IMO replacing new features may introduce new
>> bugs to existing APP UI in EMM. Anyway if new UI will go to a high stable
>> position and APPM release is not going to conflict with EMM release this
>> will be possible. right? WDYT?
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 12:21 AM, Chathura Dilan 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Lakshman,
>>>
>>> ​​This feature will not introduce any bugs in store or publisher,
>>> since it only on/off assets types.  But we have to test all scenarios of
>>> EMM and AppM integration.
>>>
>>> On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 7:03 AM, Lakshman Udayakantha <
>>> lakshm...@wso2.com> wrote:
>>>
 [Adding Dev]

 On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 5:40 PM, Prabath Abeysekera <
 praba...@wso2.com> wrote:

> Hi Lakshman,
>
> Of course we should. Would you be able to move this discussion to
> dev@ so we can discuss about any possible concerns, etc there.
>
> Cheers,
> Prabath
>
> On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 2:53 PM, Lakshman Udayakantha <
> lakshm...@wso2.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi EMM Team,
>>
>> It can be turned off asset types which are not in use in latest
>> APP Manager. There is a configuration called EnabledAssetTypeList in 
>> which
>> we can provide only mobileapp to enable mobile apps only in 
>> publisher and
>> store. So shall we do the $subject, for the sake of getting future
>> improvements and bug fixes in APPM.
>>
>> @APPM Team: Are there any bad consequences of doing $subject like
>> introducing new bugs to existing store and publisher in EMM(APPM 
>> feature
>> version 1.1.1)?
>>
>> Thanks
>> --
>> Lakshman Udayakantha
>> WSO2 Inc. www.wso2.com
>> lean.enterprise.middleware
>> Mobile: *0714388124 <0714388124>*
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Prabath Abeysekara
> Technical Lead
> WSO2 

Re: [Dev] Shall we use latest APPM in EMM?

[Ruwan Abeykoon]

Hi All,
I could recall moving some the DB related stuff to Gateway Feature some
time back in order to do EMM feature release. Please check if GW feature is
included, or if something crept to Store side.

Cheers,
Ruwan

On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 3:01 PM, Prabath Abeysekera 
wrote:

> Hi Dinusha,
>
> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 2:54 PM, Dinusha Senanayaka 
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Prabath,
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 2:34 PM, Prabath Abeysekera 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Dinusha,
>>>
>>> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 2:19 PM, Dinusha Senanayaka 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 Hi Lakshman,

 On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 2:08 PM, Lakshman Udayakantha <
 lakshm...@wso2.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I am looking into this. After changing the APP Manager feature
> versions in EMM, publisher works as expected. It can create and publish
> mobile apps without any issue. But I can't even login to store. According
> to backend error, It seems like EMM wants APP Manager related db tables
> too. I have added APP Manager tables to AM datasource and after that I can
> login to store without any issue and published apps also shown in there.
> Anyway is that ok to add APP Manager tables to AM datasource?
>

 I think it should be fine to include AppM datasource in EMM. Currently
 we don't need it for mobile apps. But there could be scenarios in future we
 need AppM db for mobile apps as well.

>>>
>>> If "mobile application provisioning plugin" doesn't require persisting
>>> information, why exactly do we need to add tables, etc just to get the
>>> store to work?
>>>
>>
>> This we need to check. AFAIK, EMM is installing only appm.store,
>> appm.publisher, appm.mobile features which is not depend on appm.core
>> feature which provides the db. May be we have installed additional feature ?
>>
>
> That can possibly be the case. Thanks for the insight.
>
> @Lakshman, would you be able to double check if this is what's demanding
> us to install these persistent entities? If that's the case, we might have
> to revisit the list of features we've put into p2-profile around app-mgt
> functionalities.
>
> Cheers,
> Prabath
>
>
>>
>> Regards,
>> Dinusha.
>>
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Prabath
>>>
>>>

 Regards,
 Dinusha.

>
> Thanks
>
> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 2:43 PM, Milan Perera  wrote:
>
>> Hi Dinusha,
>>
>> I totally agree to what you said. Its better if we can do this as
>> soon as possible.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 2:31 PM, Dinusha Senanayaka > > wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Milan,
>>>
>>> IMO, if we have version conflicts we should try to fix it. What we
>>> have done so far is not correct. We have created a separate branch of 
>>> AppM
>>> for EMM by manually removing the web app related UIs. We have done it 
>>> for
>>> the time being, but this won't scale when it comes to 
>>> support/maintenance
>>> and feature development. With the feature that Lakshman has done, we 
>>> could
>>> use the same code base for both AppM and EMM.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Dinusha.
>>>
>>> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 2:11 PM, Milan Perera 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 Hi Lakshman,

 As I remember, we have tried it before and in the previous attempt
 of migrating to the latest APPM feature was failed due to some 
 conflicts in
 dependencies that were unable to resolve at that time. If im not 
 mistaken,
 it had conflicts with the IS version which we use in the EMM 200.

 Regards,

 On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 7:25 AM, Lakshman Udayakantha <
 lakshm...@wso2.com> wrote:

> Hi Chathura,
>
> Yes. It is not because of asset turning off/on feature. I meant
> that UI has changed a lot in latest APP Manager recently and APPM team
> didn't get much time to resolve all the bugs reported. As per the 
> offline
> discussion with LahiruC lot of mobile features has broken with new UI 
> and
> they are fixing it now. So IMO replacing new features may introduce 
> new
> bugs to existing APP UI in EMM. Anyway if new UI will go to a high 
> stable
> position and APPM release is not going to conflict with EMM release 
> this
> will be possible. right? WDYT?
>
> Thanks
>
> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 12:21 AM, Chathura Dilan <
> chathu...@wso2.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Lakshman,
>>
>> ​​This feature will not introduce any bugs in store or publisher,
>> since it only on/off assets types.  But we have to test all 
>> scenarios of
>> EMM and AppM integration.
>>
>> 

Re: [Dev] Shall we use latest APPM in EMM?

[Lakshman Udayakantha]

Hi,

I am looking into this. After changing the APP Manager feature versions in
EMM, publisher works as expected. It can create and publish mobile apps
without any issue. But I can't even login to store. According to backend
error, It seems like EMM wants APP Manager related db tables too. I have
added APP Manager tables to AM datasource and after that I can login to
store without any issue and published apps also shown in there. Anyway is
that ok to add APP Manager tables to AM datasource?

Thanks

On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 2:43 PM, Milan Perera  wrote:

> Hi Dinusha,
>
> I totally agree to what you said. Its better if we can do this as soon as
> possible.
>
> Regards,
>
> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 2:31 PM, Dinusha Senanayaka 
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Milan,
>>
>> IMO, if we have version conflicts we should try to fix it. What we have
>> done so far is not correct. We have created a separate branch of AppM for
>> EMM by manually removing the web app related UIs. We have done it for the
>> time being, but this won't scale when it comes to support/maintenance and
>> feature development. With the feature that Lakshman has done, we could use
>> the same code base for both AppM and EMM.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Dinusha.
>>
>> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 2:11 PM, Milan Perera  wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Lakshman,
>>>
>>> As I remember, we have tried it before and in the previous attempt of
>>> migrating to the latest APPM feature was failed due to some conflicts in
>>> dependencies that were unable to resolve at that time. If im not mistaken,
>>> it had conflicts with the IS version which we use in the EMM 200.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 7:25 AM, Lakshman Udayakantha <
>>> lakshm...@wso2.com> wrote:
>>>
 Hi Chathura,

 Yes. It is not because of asset turning off/on feature. I meant that UI
 has changed a lot in latest APP Manager recently and APPM team didn't get
 much time to resolve all the bugs reported. As per the offline discussion
 with LahiruC lot of mobile features has broken with new UI and they are
 fixing it now. So IMO replacing new features may introduce new bugs to
 existing APP UI in EMM. Anyway if new UI will go to a high stable position
 and APPM release is not going to conflict with EMM release this will be
 possible. right? WDYT?

 Thanks

 On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 12:21 AM, Chathura Dilan 
 wrote:

> Hi Lakshman,
>
> ​​This feature will not introduce any bugs in store or publisher,
> since it only on/off assets types.  But we have to test all scenarios of
> EMM and AppM integration.
>
> On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 7:03 AM, Lakshman Udayakantha <
> lakshm...@wso2.com> wrote:
>
>> [Adding Dev]
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 5:40 PM, Prabath Abeysekera <
>> praba...@wso2.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Lakshman,
>>>
>>> Of course we should. Would you be able to move this discussion to
>>> dev@ so we can discuss about any possible concerns, etc there.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Prabath
>>>
>>> On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 2:53 PM, Lakshman Udayakantha <
>>> lakshm...@wso2.com> wrote:
>>>
 Hi EMM Team,

 It can be turned off asset types which are not in use in latest APP
 Manager. There is a configuration called EnabledAssetTypeList in which 
 we
 can provide only mobileapp to enable mobile apps only in publisher and
 store. So shall we do the $subject, for the sake of getting future
 improvements and bug fixes in APPM.

 @APPM Team: Are there any bad consequences of doing $subject like
 introducing new bugs to existing store and publisher in EMM(APPM 
 feature
 version 1.1.1)?

 Thanks
 --
 Lakshman Udayakantha
 WSO2 Inc. www.wso2.com
 lean.enterprise.middleware
 Mobile: *0714388124 <0714388124>*


>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Prabath Abeysekara
>>> Technical Lead
>>> WSO2 Inc.
>>> Email: praba...@wso2.com
>>> Mobile: +94774171471
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Lakshman Udayakantha
>> WSO2 Inc. www.wso2.com
>> lean.enterprise.middleware
>> Mobile: *0714388124 <0714388124>*
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Regards,
>
> Chatura Dilan Perera
> *Senior Software Engineer** - WSO2 Inc.*
> www.dilan.me
>



 --
 Lakshman Udayakantha
 WSO2 Inc. www.wso2.com
 lean.enterprise.middleware
 Mobile: *0714388124 <0714388124>*


>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> *Milan Perera *| Software Engineer
>>> WSO2, Inc | lean. enterprise. middleware.
>>> #20, Palm Grove, Colombo 03, Sri Lanka
>>> Mobile: +94 77 309 7088 | Work: +94 11 214 5345
>>> Email: mi...@wso2.com  | Web: www.wso2.com
>>> 

Re: [Dev] Shall we use latest APPM in EMM?

[Ruwan Abeykoon]

Hi All,
I think APM_SUBSCRIBER is used to check subscription on WebApps or Sites.
I think adding subscriber to this table can be moved to place where the
subscription is added. We might have to revisit and change the SQL queries
which is used to check the subscriptions.

Cheers,
Ruwan

On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 4:49 PM, Lakshman Udayakantha 
wrote:

> Hi Dinusha,
>
> When user is going to login to store, user will add if does not exist, to
> a table called APM_SUBSCRIBER . This code snippet has removed in EMM store
> (in APPM 1.1.1 version). That's why earlier this problem is not raised.
> Anyway what is the purpose of adding user to the APM_SUBSCRIBER table? Note
> that this table is the only dependant table from APPM to EMM.
>
> Thanks
>
> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 3:01 PM, Prabath Abeysekera 
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Dinusha,
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 2:54 PM, Dinusha Senanayaka 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Prabath,
>>>
>>> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 2:34 PM, Prabath Abeysekera 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 Hi Dinusha,

 On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 2:19 PM, Dinusha Senanayaka 
 wrote:

> Hi Lakshman,
>
> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 2:08 PM, Lakshman Udayakantha <
> lakshm...@wso2.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I am looking into this. After changing the APP Manager feature
>> versions in EMM, publisher works as expected. It can create and publish
>> mobile apps without any issue. But I can't even login to store. According
>> to backend error, It seems like EMM wants APP Manager related db tables
>> too. I have added APP Manager tables to AM datasource and after that I 
>> can
>> login to store without any issue and published apps also shown in there.
>> Anyway is that ok to add APP Manager tables to AM datasource?
>>
>
> I think it should be fine to include AppM datasource in EMM. Currently
> we don't need it for mobile apps. But there could be scenarios in future 
> we
> need AppM db for mobile apps as well.
>

 If "mobile application provisioning plugin" doesn't require persisting
 information, why exactly do we need to add tables, etc just to get the
 store to work?

>>>
>>> This we need to check. AFAIK, EMM is installing only appm.store,
>>> appm.publisher, appm.mobile features which is not depend on appm.core
>>> feature which provides the db. May be we have installed additional feature ?
>>>
>>
>> That can possibly be the case. Thanks for the insight.
>>
>> @Lakshman, would you be able to double check if this is what's demanding
>> us to install these persistent entities? If that's the case, we might have
>> to revisit the list of features we've put into p2-profile around app-mgt
>> functionalities.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Prabath
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Dinusha.
>>>

 Cheers,
 Prabath


>
> Regards,
> Dinusha.
>
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 2:43 PM, Milan Perera  wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Dinusha,
>>>
>>> I totally agree to what you said. Its better if we can do this as
>>> soon as possible.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 2:31 PM, Dinusha Senanayaka <
>>> dinu...@wso2.com> wrote:
>>>
 Hi Milan,

 IMO, if we have version conflicts we should try to fix it. What we
 have done so far is not correct. We have created a separate branch of 
 AppM
 for EMM by manually removing the web app related UIs. We have done it 
 for
 the time being, but this won't scale when it comes to 
 support/maintenance
 and feature development. With the feature that Lakshman has done, we 
 could
 use the same code base for both AppM and EMM.

 Regards,
 Dinusha.

 On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 2:11 PM, Milan Perera 
 wrote:

> Hi Lakshman,
>
> As I remember, we have tried it before and in the previous attempt
> of migrating to the latest APPM feature was failed due to some 
> conflicts in
> dependencies that were unable to resolve at that time. If im not 
> mistaken,
> it had conflicts with the IS version which we use in the EMM 200.
>
> Regards,
>
> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 7:25 AM, Lakshman Udayakantha <
> lakshm...@wso2.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Chathura,
>>
>> Yes. It is not because of asset turning off/on feature. I meant
>> that UI has changed a lot in latest APP Manager recently and APPM 
>> team
>> didn't get much time to resolve all the bugs reported. As per the 
>> offline
>> discussion with LahiruC lot of mobile features has broken with new 
>> UI and
>> they are fixing 

Re: [Dev] Shall we use latest APPM in EMM?

[Milan Perera]

Hi Dinusha,

I totally agree to what you said. Its better if we can do this as soon as
possible.

Regards,

On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 2:31 PM, Dinusha Senanayaka 
wrote:

> Hi Milan,
>
> IMO, if we have version conflicts we should try to fix it. What we have
> done so far is not correct. We have created a separate branch of AppM for
> EMM by manually removing the web app related UIs. We have done it for the
> time being, but this won't scale when it comes to support/maintenance and
> feature development. With the feature that Lakshman has done, we could use
> the same code base for both AppM and EMM.
>
> Regards,
> Dinusha.
>
> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 2:11 PM, Milan Perera  wrote:
>
>> Hi Lakshman,
>>
>> As I remember, we have tried it before and in the previous attempt of
>> migrating to the latest APPM feature was failed due to some conflicts in
>> dependencies that were unable to resolve at that time. If im not mistaken,
>> it had conflicts with the IS version which we use in the EMM 200.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 7:25 AM, Lakshman Udayakantha > > wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Chathura,
>>>
>>> Yes. It is not because of asset turning off/on feature. I meant that UI
>>> has changed a lot in latest APP Manager recently and APPM team didn't get
>>> much time to resolve all the bugs reported. As per the offline discussion
>>> with LahiruC lot of mobile features has broken with new UI and they are
>>> fixing it now. So IMO replacing new features may introduce new bugs to
>>> existing APP UI in EMM. Anyway if new UI will go to a high stable position
>>> and APPM release is not going to conflict with EMM release this will be
>>> possible. right? WDYT?
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>>
>>> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 12:21 AM, Chathura Dilan 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 Hi Lakshman,

 ​​This feature will not introduce any bugs in store or publisher, since
 it only on/off assets types.  But we have to test all scenarios of EMM and
 AppM integration.

 On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 7:03 AM, Lakshman Udayakantha <
 lakshm...@wso2.com> wrote:

> [Adding Dev]
>
> On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 5:40 PM, Prabath Abeysekera  > wrote:
>
>> Hi Lakshman,
>>
>> Of course we should. Would you be able to move this discussion to dev@
>> so we can discuss about any possible concerns, etc there.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Prabath
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 2:53 PM, Lakshman Udayakantha <
>> lakshm...@wso2.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi EMM Team,
>>>
>>> It can be turned off asset types which are not in use in latest APP
>>> Manager. There is a configuration called EnabledAssetTypeList in which 
>>> we
>>> can provide only mobileapp to enable mobile apps only in publisher and
>>> store. So shall we do the $subject, for the sake of getting future
>>> improvements and bug fixes in APPM.
>>>
>>> @APPM Team: Are there any bad consequences of doing $subject like
>>> introducing new bugs to existing store and publisher in EMM(APPM feature
>>> version 1.1.1)?
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>> --
>>> Lakshman Udayakantha
>>> WSO2 Inc. www.wso2.com
>>> lean.enterprise.middleware
>>> Mobile: *0714388124 <0714388124>*
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Prabath Abeysekara
>> Technical Lead
>> WSO2 Inc.
>> Email: praba...@wso2.com
>> Mobile: +94774171471
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Lakshman Udayakantha
> WSO2 Inc. www.wso2.com
> lean.enterprise.middleware
> Mobile: *0714388124 <0714388124>*
>
>


 --
 Regards,

 Chatura Dilan Perera
 *Senior Software Engineer** - WSO2 Inc.*
 www.dilan.me

>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Lakshman Udayakantha
>>> WSO2 Inc. www.wso2.com
>>> lean.enterprise.middleware
>>> Mobile: *0714388124 <0714388124>*
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> *Milan Perera *| Software Engineer
>> WSO2, Inc | lean. enterprise. middleware.
>> #20, Palm Grove, Colombo 03, Sri Lanka
>> Mobile: +94 77 309 7088 | Work: +94 11 214 5345
>> Email: mi...@wso2.com  | Web: www.wso2.com
>> 
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Dinusha Dilrukshi
> Associate Technical Lead
> WSO2 Inc.: http://wso2.com/
> Mobile: +94725255071
> Blog: http://dinushasblog.blogspot.com/
>



-- 
*Milan Perera *| Software Engineer
WSO2, Inc | lean. enterprise. middleware.
#20, Palm Grove, Colombo 03, Sri Lanka
Mobile: +94 77 309 7088 | Work: +94 11 214 5345
Email: mi...@wso2.com  | Web: www.wso2.com

___
Dev mailing list
Dev@wso2.org
http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev

Re: [Dev] Shall we use latest APPM in EMM?

[Lakshman Udayakantha]

Hi Chathura,

Yes. It is not because of asset turning off/on feature. I meant that UI has
changed a lot in latest APP Manager recently and APPM team didn't get much
time to resolve all the bugs reported. As per the offline discussion with
LahiruC lot of mobile features has broken with new UI and they are fixing
it now. So IMO replacing new features may introduce new bugs to existing
APP UI in EMM. Anyway if new UI will go to a high stable position and APPM
release is not going to conflict with EMM release this will be possible.
right? WDYT?

Thanks

On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 12:21 AM, Chathura Dilan  wrote:

> Hi Lakshman,
>
> ​​This feature will not introduce any bugs in store or publisher, since it
> only on/off assets types.  But we have to test all scenarios of EMM and
> AppM integration.
>
> On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 7:03 AM, Lakshman Udayakantha 
> wrote:
>
>> [Adding Dev]
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 5:40 PM, Prabath Abeysekera 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Lakshman,
>>>
>>> Of course we should. Would you be able to move this discussion to dev@
>>> so we can discuss about any possible concerns, etc there.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Prabath
>>>
>>> On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 2:53 PM, Lakshman Udayakantha <
>>> lakshm...@wso2.com> wrote:
>>>
 Hi EMM Team,

 It can be turned off asset types which are not in use in latest APP
 Manager. There is a configuration called EnabledAssetTypeList in which we
 can provide only mobileapp to enable mobile apps only in publisher and
 store. So shall we do the $subject, for the sake of getting future
 improvements and bug fixes in APPM.

 @APPM Team: Are there any bad consequences of doing $subject like
 introducing new bugs to existing store and publisher in EMM(APPM feature
 version 1.1.1)?

 Thanks
 --
 Lakshman Udayakantha
 WSO2 Inc. www.wso2.com
 lean.enterprise.middleware
 Mobile: *0714388124 <0714388124>*


>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Prabath Abeysekara
>>> Technical Lead
>>> WSO2 Inc.
>>> Email: praba...@wso2.com
>>> Mobile: +94774171471
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Lakshman Udayakantha
>> WSO2 Inc. www.wso2.com
>> lean.enterprise.middleware
>> Mobile: *0714388124*
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Regards,
>
> Chatura Dilan Perera
> *Senior Software Engineer** - WSO2 Inc.*
> www.dilan.me
>



-- 
Lakshman Udayakantha
WSO2 Inc. www.wso2.com
lean.enterprise.middleware
Mobile: *0714388124*
___
Dev mailing list
Dev@wso2.org
http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev

Re: [Dev] Shall we use latest APPM in EMM?

[Lakshman Udayakantha]

Hi Dinusha,

When user is going to login to store, user will add if does not exist, to a
table called APM_SUBSCRIBER . This code snippet has removed in EMM store
(in APPM 1.1.1 version). That's why earlier this problem is not raised.
Anyway what is the purpose of adding user to the APM_SUBSCRIBER table? Note
that this table is the only dependant table from APPM to EMM.

Thanks

On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 3:01 PM, Prabath Abeysekera 
wrote:

> Hi Dinusha,
>
> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 2:54 PM, Dinusha Senanayaka 
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Prabath,
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 2:34 PM, Prabath Abeysekera 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Dinusha,
>>>
>>> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 2:19 PM, Dinusha Senanayaka 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 Hi Lakshman,

 On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 2:08 PM, Lakshman Udayakantha <
 lakshm...@wso2.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I am looking into this. After changing the APP Manager feature
> versions in EMM, publisher works as expected. It can create and publish
> mobile apps without any issue. But I can't even login to store. According
> to backend error, It seems like EMM wants APP Manager related db tables
> too. I have added APP Manager tables to AM datasource and after that I can
> login to store without any issue and published apps also shown in there.
> Anyway is that ok to add APP Manager tables to AM datasource?
>

 I think it should be fine to include AppM datasource in EMM. Currently
 we don't need it for mobile apps. But there could be scenarios in future we
 need AppM db for mobile apps as well.

>>>
>>> If "mobile application provisioning plugin" doesn't require persisting
>>> information, why exactly do we need to add tables, etc just to get the
>>> store to work?
>>>
>>
>> This we need to check. AFAIK, EMM is installing only appm.store,
>> appm.publisher, appm.mobile features which is not depend on appm.core
>> feature which provides the db. May be we have installed additional feature ?
>>
>
> That can possibly be the case. Thanks for the insight.
>
> @Lakshman, would you be able to double check if this is what's demanding
> us to install these persistent entities? If that's the case, we might have
> to revisit the list of features we've put into p2-profile around app-mgt
> functionalities.
>
> Cheers,
> Prabath
>
>
>>
>> Regards,
>> Dinusha.
>>
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Prabath
>>>
>>>

 Regards,
 Dinusha.

>
> Thanks
>
> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 2:43 PM, Milan Perera  wrote:
>
>> Hi Dinusha,
>>
>> I totally agree to what you said. Its better if we can do this as
>> soon as possible.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 2:31 PM, Dinusha Senanayaka > > wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Milan,
>>>
>>> IMO, if we have version conflicts we should try to fix it. What we
>>> have done so far is not correct. We have created a separate branch of 
>>> AppM
>>> for EMM by manually removing the web app related UIs. We have done it 
>>> for
>>> the time being, but this won't scale when it comes to 
>>> support/maintenance
>>> and feature development. With the feature that Lakshman has done, we 
>>> could
>>> use the same code base for both AppM and EMM.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Dinusha.
>>>
>>> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 2:11 PM, Milan Perera 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 Hi Lakshman,

 As I remember, we have tried it before and in the previous attempt
 of migrating to the latest APPM feature was failed due to some 
 conflicts in
 dependencies that were unable to resolve at that time. If im not 
 mistaken,
 it had conflicts with the IS version which we use in the EMM 200.

 Regards,

 On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 7:25 AM, Lakshman Udayakantha <
 lakshm...@wso2.com> wrote:

> Hi Chathura,
>
> Yes. It is not because of asset turning off/on feature. I meant
> that UI has changed a lot in latest APP Manager recently and APPM team
> didn't get much time to resolve all the bugs reported. As per the 
> offline
> discussion with LahiruC lot of mobile features has broken with new UI 
> and
> they are fixing it now. So IMO replacing new features may introduce 
> new
> bugs to existing APP UI in EMM. Anyway if new UI will go to a high 
> stable
> position and APPM release is not going to conflict with EMM release 
> this
> will be possible. right? WDYT?
>
> Thanks
>
> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 12:21 AM, Chathura Dilan <
> chathu...@wso2.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Lakshman,
>>
>> ​​This feature will not introduce any bugs in store or 

Re: [Dev] Shall we use latest APPM in EMM?

[Milan Perera]

Hi Lakshman,

As I remember, we have tried it before and in the previous attempt of
migrating to the latest APPM feature was failed due to some conflicts in
dependencies that were unable to resolve at that time. If im not mistaken,
it had conflicts with the IS version which we use in the EMM 200.

Regards,

On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 7:25 AM, Lakshman Udayakantha 
wrote:

> Hi Chathura,
>
> Yes. It is not because of asset turning off/on feature. I meant that UI
> has changed a lot in latest APP Manager recently and APPM team didn't get
> much time to resolve all the bugs reported. As per the offline discussion
> with LahiruC lot of mobile features has broken with new UI and they are
> fixing it now. So IMO replacing new features may introduce new bugs to
> existing APP UI in EMM. Anyway if new UI will go to a high stable position
> and APPM release is not going to conflict with EMM release this will be
> possible. right? WDYT?
>
> Thanks
>
> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 12:21 AM, Chathura Dilan 
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Lakshman,
>>
>> ​​This feature will not introduce any bugs in store or publisher, since
>> it only on/off assets types.  But we have to test all scenarios of EMM and
>> AppM integration.
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 7:03 AM, Lakshman Udayakantha > > wrote:
>>
>>> [Adding Dev]
>>>
>>> On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 5:40 PM, Prabath Abeysekera 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 Hi Lakshman,

 Of course we should. Would you be able to move this discussion to dev@
 so we can discuss about any possible concerns, etc there.

 Cheers,
 Prabath

 On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 2:53 PM, Lakshman Udayakantha <
 lakshm...@wso2.com> wrote:

> Hi EMM Team,
>
> It can be turned off asset types which are not in use in latest APP
> Manager. There is a configuration called EnabledAssetTypeList in which we
> can provide only mobileapp to enable mobile apps only in publisher and
> store. So shall we do the $subject, for the sake of getting future
> improvements and bug fixes in APPM.
>
> @APPM Team: Are there any bad consequences of doing $subject like
> introducing new bugs to existing store and publisher in EMM(APPM feature
> version 1.1.1)?
>
> Thanks
> --
> Lakshman Udayakantha
> WSO2 Inc. www.wso2.com
> lean.enterprise.middleware
> Mobile: *0714388124 <0714388124>*
>
>


 --
 Prabath Abeysekara
 Technical Lead
 WSO2 Inc.
 Email: praba...@wso2.com
 Mobile: +94774171471

>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Lakshman Udayakantha
>>> WSO2 Inc. www.wso2.com
>>> lean.enterprise.middleware
>>> Mobile: *0714388124*
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Regards,
>>
>> Chatura Dilan Perera
>> *Senior Software Engineer** - WSO2 Inc.*
>> www.dilan.me
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Lakshman Udayakantha
> WSO2 Inc. www.wso2.com
> lean.enterprise.middleware
> Mobile: *0714388124*
>
>


-- 
*Milan Perera *| Software Engineer
WSO2, Inc | lean. enterprise. middleware.
#20, Palm Grove, Colombo 03, Sri Lanka
Mobile: +94 77 309 7088 | Work: +94 11 214 5345
Email: mi...@wso2.com  | Web: www.wso2.com

___
Dev mailing list
Dev@wso2.org
http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev

Re: [Dev] Shall we use latest APPM in EMM?

[Dinusha Senanayaka]

Hi Prabath,

On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 2:34 PM, Prabath Abeysekera 
wrote:

> Hi Dinusha,
>
> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 2:19 PM, Dinusha Senanayaka 
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Lakshman,
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 2:08 PM, Lakshman Udayakantha > > wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I am looking into this. After changing the APP Manager feature versions
>>> in EMM, publisher works as expected. It can create and publish mobile apps
>>> without any issue. But I can't even login to store. According to backend
>>> error, It seems like EMM wants APP Manager related db tables too. I have
>>> added APP Manager tables to AM datasource and after that I can login to
>>> store without any issue and published apps also shown in there. Anyway is
>>> that ok to add APP Manager tables to AM datasource?
>>>
>>
>> I think it should be fine to include AppM datasource in EMM. Currently we
>> don't need it for mobile apps. But there could be scenarios in future we
>> need AppM db for mobile apps as well.
>>
>
> If "mobile application provisioning plugin" doesn't require persisting
> information, why exactly do we need to add tables, etc just to get the
> store to work?
>

This we need to check. AFAIK, EMM is installing only appm.store,
appm.publisher, appm.mobile features which is not depend on appm.core
feature which provides the db. May be we have installed additional feature ?

Regards,
Dinusha.

>
> Cheers,
> Prabath
>
>
>>
>> Regards,
>> Dinusha.
>>
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>>
>>> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 2:43 PM, Milan Perera  wrote:
>>>
 Hi Dinusha,

 I totally agree to what you said. Its better if we can do this as soon
 as possible.

 Regards,

 On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 2:31 PM, Dinusha Senanayaka 
 wrote:

> Hi Milan,
>
> IMO, if we have version conflicts we should try to fix it. What we
> have done so far is not correct. We have created a separate branch of AppM
> for EMM by manually removing the web app related UIs. We have done it for
> the time being, but this won't scale when it comes to support/maintenance
> and feature development. With the feature that Lakshman has done, we could
> use the same code base for both AppM and EMM.
>
> Regards,
> Dinusha.
>
> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 2:11 PM, Milan Perera  wrote:
>
>> Hi Lakshman,
>>
>> As I remember, we have tried it before and in the previous attempt of
>> migrating to the latest APPM feature was failed due to some conflicts in
>> dependencies that were unable to resolve at that time. If im not 
>> mistaken,
>> it had conflicts with the IS version which we use in the EMM 200.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 7:25 AM, Lakshman Udayakantha <
>> lakshm...@wso2.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Chathura,
>>>
>>> Yes. It is not because of asset turning off/on feature. I meant that
>>> UI has changed a lot in latest APP Manager recently and APPM team didn't
>>> get much time to resolve all the bugs reported. As per the offline
>>> discussion with LahiruC lot of mobile features has broken with new UI 
>>> and
>>> they are fixing it now. So IMO replacing new features may introduce new
>>> bugs to existing APP UI in EMM. Anyway if new UI will go to a high 
>>> stable
>>> position and APPM release is not going to conflict with EMM release this
>>> will be possible. right? WDYT?
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>>
>>> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 12:21 AM, Chathura Dilan >> > wrote:
>>>
 Hi Lakshman,

 ​​This feature will not introduce any bugs in store or publisher,
 since it only on/off assets types.  But we have to test all scenarios 
 of
 EMM and AppM integration.

 On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 7:03 AM, Lakshman Udayakantha <
 lakshm...@wso2.com> wrote:

> [Adding Dev]
>
> On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 5:40 PM, Prabath Abeysekera <
> praba...@wso2.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Lakshman,
>>
>> Of course we should. Would you be able to move this discussion to
>> dev@ so we can discuss about any possible concerns, etc there.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Prabath
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 2:53 PM, Lakshman Udayakantha <
>> lakshm...@wso2.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi EMM Team,
>>>
>>> It can be turned off asset types which are not in use in latest
>>> APP Manager. There is a configuration called EnabledAssetTypeList 
>>> in which
>>> we can provide only mobileapp to enable mobile apps only in 
>>> publisher and
>>> store. So shall we do the $subject, for the sake of getting future
>>> improvements and bug fixes in APPM.
>>>
>>> 

Re: [Dev] Shall we use latest APPM in EMM?

[Dinusha Senanayaka]

Hi Milan,

IMO, if we have version conflicts we should try to fix it. What we have
done so far is not correct. We have created a separate branch of AppM for
EMM by manually removing the web app related UIs. We have done it for the
time being, but this won't scale when it comes to support/maintenance and
feature development. With the feature that Lakshman has done, we could use
the same code base for both AppM and EMM.

Regards,
Dinusha.

On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 2:11 PM, Milan Perera  wrote:

> Hi Lakshman,
>
> As I remember, we have tried it before and in the previous attempt of
> migrating to the latest APPM feature was failed due to some conflicts in
> dependencies that were unable to resolve at that time. If im not mistaken,
> it had conflicts with the IS version which we use in the EMM 200.
>
> Regards,
>
> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 7:25 AM, Lakshman Udayakantha 
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Chathura,
>>
>> Yes. It is not because of asset turning off/on feature. I meant that UI
>> has changed a lot in latest APP Manager recently and APPM team didn't get
>> much time to resolve all the bugs reported. As per the offline discussion
>> with LahiruC lot of mobile features has broken with new UI and they are
>> fixing it now. So IMO replacing new features may introduce new bugs to
>> existing APP UI in EMM. Anyway if new UI will go to a high stable position
>> and APPM release is not going to conflict with EMM release this will be
>> possible. right? WDYT?
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 12:21 AM, Chathura Dilan 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Lakshman,
>>>
>>> ​​This feature will not introduce any bugs in store or publisher, since
>>> it only on/off assets types.  But we have to test all scenarios of EMM and
>>> AppM integration.
>>>
>>> On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 7:03 AM, Lakshman Udayakantha <
>>> lakshm...@wso2.com> wrote:
>>>
 [Adding Dev]

 On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 5:40 PM, Prabath Abeysekera 
 wrote:

> Hi Lakshman,
>
> Of course we should. Would you be able to move this discussion to dev@
> so we can discuss about any possible concerns, etc there.
>
> Cheers,
> Prabath
>
> On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 2:53 PM, Lakshman Udayakantha <
> lakshm...@wso2.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi EMM Team,
>>
>> It can be turned off asset types which are not in use in latest APP
>> Manager. There is a configuration called EnabledAssetTypeList in which we
>> can provide only mobileapp to enable mobile apps only in publisher and
>> store. So shall we do the $subject, for the sake of getting future
>> improvements and bug fixes in APPM.
>>
>> @APPM Team: Are there any bad consequences of doing $subject like
>> introducing new bugs to existing store and publisher in EMM(APPM feature
>> version 1.1.1)?
>>
>> Thanks
>> --
>> Lakshman Udayakantha
>> WSO2 Inc. www.wso2.com
>> lean.enterprise.middleware
>> Mobile: *0714388124 <0714388124>*
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Prabath Abeysekara
> Technical Lead
> WSO2 Inc.
> Email: praba...@wso2.com
> Mobile: +94774171471
>



 --
 Lakshman Udayakantha
 WSO2 Inc. www.wso2.com
 lean.enterprise.middleware
 Mobile: *0714388124 <0714388124>*


>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Chatura Dilan Perera
>>> *Senior Software Engineer** - WSO2 Inc.*
>>> www.dilan.me
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Lakshman Udayakantha
>> WSO2 Inc. www.wso2.com
>> lean.enterprise.middleware
>> Mobile: *0714388124 <0714388124>*
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> *Milan Perera *| Software Engineer
> WSO2, Inc | lean. enterprise. middleware.
> #20, Palm Grove, Colombo 03, Sri Lanka
> Mobile: +94 77 309 7088 | Work: +94 11 214 5345
> Email: mi...@wso2.com  | Web: www.wso2.com
> 
>



-- 
Dinusha Dilrukshi
Associate Technical Lead
WSO2 Inc.: http://wso2.com/
Mobile: +94725255071
Blog: http://dinushasblog.blogspot.com/
___
Dev mailing list
Dev@wso2.org
http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev

Re: [Dev] Shall we use latest APPM in EMM?

[Prabath Abeysekera]

Hi Dinusha,

On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 2:54 PM, Dinusha Senanayaka 
wrote:

> Hi Prabath,
>
> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 2:34 PM, Prabath Abeysekera 
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Dinusha,
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 2:19 PM, Dinusha Senanayaka 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Lakshman,
>>>
>>> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 2:08 PM, Lakshman Udayakantha <
>>> lakshm...@wso2.com> wrote:
>>>
 Hi,

 I am looking into this. After changing the APP Manager feature versions
 in EMM, publisher works as expected. It can create and publish mobile apps
 without any issue. But I can't even login to store. According to backend
 error, It seems like EMM wants APP Manager related db tables too. I have
 added APP Manager tables to AM datasource and after that I can login to
 store without any issue and published apps also shown in there. Anyway is
 that ok to add APP Manager tables to AM datasource?

>>>
>>> I think it should be fine to include AppM datasource in EMM. Currently
>>> we don't need it for mobile apps. But there could be scenarios in future we
>>> need AppM db for mobile apps as well.
>>>
>>
>> If "mobile application provisioning plugin" doesn't require persisting
>> information, why exactly do we need to add tables, etc just to get the
>> store to work?
>>
>
> This we need to check. AFAIK, EMM is installing only appm.store,
> appm.publisher, appm.mobile features which is not depend on appm.core
> feature which provides the db. May be we have installed additional feature ?
>

That can possibly be the case. Thanks for the insight.

@Lakshman, would you be able to double check if this is what's demanding us
to install these persistent entities? If that's the case, we might have to
revisit the list of features we've put into p2-profile around app-mgt
functionalities.

Cheers,
Prabath


>
> Regards,
> Dinusha.
>
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Prabath
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Dinusha.
>>>

 Thanks

 On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 2:43 PM, Milan Perera  wrote:

> Hi Dinusha,
>
> I totally agree to what you said. Its better if we can do this as soon
> as possible.
>
> Regards,
>
> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 2:31 PM, Dinusha Senanayaka 
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Milan,
>>
>> IMO, if we have version conflicts we should try to fix it. What we
>> have done so far is not correct. We have created a separate branch of 
>> AppM
>> for EMM by manually removing the web app related UIs. We have done it for
>> the time being, but this won't scale when it comes to support/maintenance
>> and feature development. With the feature that Lakshman has done, we 
>> could
>> use the same code base for both AppM and EMM.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Dinusha.
>>
>> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 2:11 PM, Milan Perera  wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Lakshman,
>>>
>>> As I remember, we have tried it before and in the previous attempt
>>> of migrating to the latest APPM feature was failed due to some 
>>> conflicts in
>>> dependencies that were unable to resolve at that time. If im not 
>>> mistaken,
>>> it had conflicts with the IS version which we use in the EMM 200.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 7:25 AM, Lakshman Udayakantha <
>>> lakshm...@wso2.com> wrote:
>>>
 Hi Chathura,

 Yes. It is not because of asset turning off/on feature. I meant
 that UI has changed a lot in latest APP Manager recently and APPM team
 didn't get much time to resolve all the bugs reported. As per the 
 offline
 discussion with LahiruC lot of mobile features has broken with new UI 
 and
 they are fixing it now. So IMO replacing new features may introduce new
 bugs to existing APP UI in EMM. Anyway if new UI will go to a high 
 stable
 position and APPM release is not going to conflict with EMM release 
 this
 will be possible. right? WDYT?

 Thanks

 On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 12:21 AM, Chathura Dilan <
 chathu...@wso2.com> wrote:

> Hi Lakshman,
>
> ​​This feature will not introduce any bugs in store or publisher,
> since it only on/off assets types.  But we have to test all scenarios 
> of
> EMM and AppM integration.
>
> On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 7:03 AM, Lakshman Udayakantha <
> lakshm...@wso2.com> wrote:
>
>> [Adding Dev]
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 5:40 PM, Prabath Abeysekera <
>> praba...@wso2.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Lakshman,
>>>
>>> Of course we should. Would you be able to move this discussion
>>> to dev@ so we can discuss about any possible concerns, etc
>>> there.
>>>
>>> Cheers,

Re: [Dev] Shall we use latest APPM in EMM?

[Dinusha Senanayaka]

Hi All,

This is something we got from the APIM code and we need to refactor it. In
their case, users login to store can create oauth app and subscribe to
APIs. App creation also should be done by a subscriber and that's why user
is added to SUBSCRIBER table at the login. Then SUBSCRIPTION table is
populate when the actual subscription happen to API.

Anyway, AppM do not have this app creation concept in the store. Hence we
could move this SUBSCRIBER, SUBSCRIPTION both table inserts to where actual
subscription happens.

Regards,
Dinusha.

On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 8:33 PM, Lahiru Cooray  wrote:

> +1 for Ruwan's suggestion.
> Further in current model, Subscriptions(APM_SUBSCRIPTION) are mapped to a
> Application(APM_APPLICATION) and Application is bound to a subscriber
> (APM_SUBSCRIBER)
>
> Subscriber should ideally contain the users who are subscribed to an App.
> But currently APM_SUBSCRIBER table getting updated when an user log in to
> the store (which is not ideal)
> This operation should be moved to just before user get subscribed to an
> App.
>
>
> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 5:12 PM, Ruwan Abeykoon  wrote:
>
>> Hi All,
>> I think APM_SUBSCRIBER is used to check subscription on WebApps or
>> Sites.
>> I think adding subscriber to this table can be moved to place where the
>> subscription is added. We might have to revisit and change the SQL queries
>> which is used to check the subscriptions.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Ruwan
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 4:49 PM, Lakshman Udayakantha > > wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Dinusha,
>>>
>>> When user is going to login to store, user will add if does not exist,
>>> to a table called APM_SUBSCRIBER . This code snippet has removed in EMM
>>> store (in APPM 1.1.1 version). That's why earlier this problem is not
>>> raised. Anyway what is the purpose of adding user to the APM_SUBSCRIBER
>>> table? Note that this table is the only dependant table from APPM to EMM.
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>>
>>> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 3:01 PM, Prabath Abeysekera 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 Hi Dinusha,

 On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 2:54 PM, Dinusha Senanayaka 
 wrote:

> Hi Prabath,
>
> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 2:34 PM, Prabath Abeysekera  > wrote:
>
>> Hi Dinusha,
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 2:19 PM, Dinusha Senanayaka > > wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Lakshman,
>>>
>>> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 2:08 PM, Lakshman Udayakantha <
>>> lakshm...@wso2.com> wrote:
>>>
 Hi,

 I am looking into this. After changing the APP Manager feature
 versions in EMM, publisher works as expected. It can create and publish
 mobile apps without any issue. But I can't even login to store. 
 According
 to backend error, It seems like EMM wants APP Manager related db tables
 too. I have added APP Manager tables to AM datasource and after that I 
 can
 login to store without any issue and published apps also shown in 
 there.
 Anyway is that ok to add APP Manager tables to AM datasource?

>>>
>>> I think it should be fine to include AppM datasource in EMM.
>>> Currently we don't need it for mobile apps. But there could be 
>>> scenarios in
>>> future we need AppM db for mobile apps as well.
>>>
>>
>> If "mobile application provisioning plugin" doesn't require
>> persisting information, why exactly do we need to add tables, etc just to
>> get the store to work?
>>
>
> This we need to check. AFAIK, EMM is installing only appm.store,
> appm.publisher, appm.mobile features which is not depend on appm.core
> feature which provides the db. May be we have installed additional 
> feature ?
>

 That can possibly be the case. Thanks for the insight.

 @Lakshman, would you be able to double check if this is what's
 demanding us to install these persistent entities? If that's the case, we
 might have to revisit the list of features we've put into p2-profile around
 app-mgt functionalities.

 Cheers,
 Prabath


>
> Regards,
> Dinusha.
>
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Prabath
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Dinusha.
>>>

 Thanks

 On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 2:43 PM, Milan Perera 
 wrote:

> Hi Dinusha,
>
> I totally agree to what you said. Its better if we can do this as
> soon as possible.
>
> Regards,
>
> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 2:31 PM, Dinusha Senanayaka <
> dinu...@wso2.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Milan,
>>
>> IMO, if we have version conflicts we should try to fix it. What
>> we have done so far is not correct. We have created a separate 
>> branch 

Re: [Dev] Shall we use latest APPM in EMM?

[Lahiru Cooray]

+1 for Ruwan's suggestion.
Further in current model, Subscriptions(APM_SUBSCRIPTION) are mapped to a
Application(APM_APPLICATION) and Application is bound to a subscriber
(APM_SUBSCRIBER)

Subscriber should ideally contain the users who are subscribed to an App.
But currently APM_SUBSCRIBER table getting updated when an user log in to
the store (which is not ideal)
This operation should be moved to just before user get subscribed to an App.


On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 5:12 PM, Ruwan Abeykoon  wrote:

> Hi All,
> I think APM_SUBSCRIBER is used to check subscription on WebApps or Sites.
> I think adding subscriber to this table can be moved to place where the
> subscription is added. We might have to revisit and change the SQL queries
> which is used to check the subscriptions.
>
> Cheers,
> Ruwan
>
> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 4:49 PM, Lakshman Udayakantha 
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Dinusha,
>>
>> When user is going to login to store, user will add if does not exist, to
>> a table called APM_SUBSCRIBER . This code snippet has removed in EMM store
>> (in APPM 1.1.1 version). That's why earlier this problem is not raised.
>> Anyway what is the purpose of adding user to the APM_SUBSCRIBER table? Note
>> that this table is the only dependant table from APPM to EMM.
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 3:01 PM, Prabath Abeysekera 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Dinusha,
>>>
>>> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 2:54 PM, Dinusha Senanayaka 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 Hi Prabath,

 On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 2:34 PM, Prabath Abeysekera 
 wrote:

> Hi Dinusha,
>
> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 2:19 PM, Dinusha Senanayaka 
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Lakshman,
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 2:08 PM, Lakshman Udayakantha <
>> lakshm...@wso2.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I am looking into this. After changing the APP Manager feature
>>> versions in EMM, publisher works as expected. It can create and publish
>>> mobile apps without any issue. But I can't even login to store. 
>>> According
>>> to backend error, It seems like EMM wants APP Manager related db tables
>>> too. I have added APP Manager tables to AM datasource and after that I 
>>> can
>>> login to store without any issue and published apps also shown in there.
>>> Anyway is that ok to add APP Manager tables to AM datasource?
>>>
>>
>> I think it should be fine to include AppM datasource in EMM.
>> Currently we don't need it for mobile apps. But there could be scenarios 
>> in
>> future we need AppM db for mobile apps as well.
>>
>
> If "mobile application provisioning plugin" doesn't require persisting
> information, why exactly do we need to add tables, etc just to get the
> store to work?
>

 This we need to check. AFAIK, EMM is installing only appm.store,
 appm.publisher, appm.mobile features which is not depend on appm.core
 feature which provides the db. May be we have installed additional feature 
 ?

>>>
>>> That can possibly be the case. Thanks for the insight.
>>>
>>> @Lakshman, would you be able to double check if this is what's demanding
>>> us to install these persistent entities? If that's the case, we might have
>>> to revisit the list of features we've put into p2-profile around app-mgt
>>> functionalities.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Prabath
>>>
>>>

 Regards,
 Dinusha.

>
> Cheers,
> Prabath
>
>
>>
>> Regards,
>> Dinusha.
>>
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>>
>>> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 2:43 PM, Milan Perera 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 Hi Dinusha,

 I totally agree to what you said. Its better if we can do this as
 soon as possible.

 Regards,

 On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 2:31 PM, Dinusha Senanayaka <
 dinu...@wso2.com> wrote:

> Hi Milan,
>
> IMO, if we have version conflicts we should try to fix it. What we
> have done so far is not correct. We have created a separate branch of 
> AppM
> for EMM by manually removing the web app related UIs. We have done it 
> for
> the time being, but this won't scale when it comes to 
> support/maintenance
> and feature development. With the feature that Lakshman has done, we 
> could
> use the same code base for both AppM and EMM.
>
> Regards,
> Dinusha.
>
> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 2:11 PM, Milan Perera 
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Lakshman,
>>
>> As I remember, we have tried it before and in the previous
>> attempt of migrating to the latest APPM feature was failed due to 
>> some
>> conflicts in dependencies that were unable to resolve at that 

Re: [Dev] Shall we use latest APPM in EMM?

[Dinusha Senanayaka]

Hi Lakshman,

On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 2:08 PM, Lakshman Udayakantha 
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I am looking into this. After changing the APP Manager feature versions in
> EMM, publisher works as expected. It can create and publish mobile apps
> without any issue. But I can't even login to store. According to backend
> error, It seems like EMM wants APP Manager related db tables too. I have
> added APP Manager tables to AM datasource and after that I can login to
> store without any issue and published apps also shown in there. Anyway is
> that ok to add APP Manager tables to AM datasource?
>

I think it should be fine to include AppM datasource in EMM. Currently we
don't need it for mobile apps. But there could be scenarios in future we
need AppM db for mobile apps as well.

Regards,
Dinusha.

>
> Thanks
>
> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 2:43 PM, Milan Perera  wrote:
>
>> Hi Dinusha,
>>
>> I totally agree to what you said. Its better if we can do this as soon as
>> possible.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 2:31 PM, Dinusha Senanayaka 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Milan,
>>>
>>> IMO, if we have version conflicts we should try to fix it. What we have
>>> done so far is not correct. We have created a separate branch of AppM for
>>> EMM by manually removing the web app related UIs. We have done it for the
>>> time being, but this won't scale when it comes to support/maintenance and
>>> feature development. With the feature that Lakshman has done, we could use
>>> the same code base for both AppM and EMM.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Dinusha.
>>>
>>> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 2:11 PM, Milan Perera  wrote:
>>>
 Hi Lakshman,

 As I remember, we have tried it before and in the previous attempt of
 migrating to the latest APPM feature was failed due to some conflicts in
 dependencies that were unable to resolve at that time. If im not mistaken,
 it had conflicts with the IS version which we use in the EMM 200.

 Regards,

 On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 7:25 AM, Lakshman Udayakantha <
 lakshm...@wso2.com> wrote:

> Hi Chathura,
>
> Yes. It is not because of asset turning off/on feature. I meant that
> UI has changed a lot in latest APP Manager recently and APPM team didn't
> get much time to resolve all the bugs reported. As per the offline
> discussion with LahiruC lot of mobile features has broken with new UI and
> they are fixing it now. So IMO replacing new features may introduce new
> bugs to existing APP UI in EMM. Anyway if new UI will go to a high stable
> position and APPM release is not going to conflict with EMM release this
> will be possible. right? WDYT?
>
> Thanks
>
> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 12:21 AM, Chathura Dilan 
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Lakshman,
>>
>> ​​This feature will not introduce any bugs in store or publisher,
>> since it only on/off assets types.  But we have to test all scenarios of
>> EMM and AppM integration.
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 7:03 AM, Lakshman Udayakantha <
>> lakshm...@wso2.com> wrote:
>>
>>> [Adding Dev]
>>>
>>> On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 5:40 PM, Prabath Abeysekera <
>>> praba...@wso2.com> wrote:
>>>
 Hi Lakshman,

 Of course we should. Would you be able to move this discussion to
 dev@ so we can discuss about any possible concerns, etc there.

 Cheers,
 Prabath

 On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 2:53 PM, Lakshman Udayakantha <
 lakshm...@wso2.com> wrote:

> Hi EMM Team,
>
> It can be turned off asset types which are not in use in latest
> APP Manager. There is a configuration called EnabledAssetTypeList in 
> which
> we can provide only mobileapp to enable mobile apps only in publisher 
> and
> store. So shall we do the $subject, for the sake of getting future
> improvements and bug fixes in APPM.
>
> @APPM Team: Are there any bad consequences of doing $subject like
> introducing new bugs to existing store and publisher in EMM(APPM 
> feature
> version 1.1.1)?
>
> Thanks
> --
> Lakshman Udayakantha
> WSO2 Inc. www.wso2.com
> lean.enterprise.middleware
> Mobile: *0714388124 <0714388124>*
>
>


 --
 Prabath Abeysekara
 Technical Lead
 WSO2 Inc.
 Email: praba...@wso2.com
 Mobile: +94774171471

>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Lakshman Udayakantha
>>> WSO2 Inc. www.wso2.com
>>> lean.enterprise.middleware
>>> Mobile: *0714388124 <0714388124>*
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Regards,
>>
>> Chatura Dilan Perera
>> *Senior Software Engineer** - WSO2 Inc.*
>> www.dilan.me
>>