syncany-team team mailing list archive

[Vincent Wiencek <vwiencek@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 9:22 AM, Philipp Heckel <philipp.heckel@xxxxxxxxx>wrote:

> Hello Vincent,
>
> while implementing GUI / Daemon, I would like to discuss with you the
>> opportunity to hook into WatchOperation to get the following information :
>> - is it running / stopped / paused ? ==> already ok via AtomicBoolean
>> within WatchOperation
>> - which files (name / size) are being downloaded / uploaded (UpOperation
>> and DownOperation) (not possible at this stage.
>>
>
> This is definitely necessary. The Down/UpOperation already return a few
> things, among others a "ChangeSet", which is basically lists of added,
> changed, and removed files. All we need to do is allow a listener in the
> WatchOperation (something like WatchOperation.add/setListener(...), or even
> in the constructor). and then react on it after Up/Down is complete and
> returned something other than an empty list.
>
> Here are options I have in mind :
>> 1/ try to use NotificationListener and adapt it to publish messages
>> relating to currently uploaded/downloaded files (filename & size) .
>> 2/ implement an eventBus (like Google Guava Event Bus
>> https://code.google.com/p/guava-libraries/wiki/EventBusExplained)
>>
>>
> Hm. I don't quite understand the options:
>
Either use existing NotificationListener and adapt ir *or* use Google
EventBut .....

>
> - 1: the NotificationListener's purpose is to notify other clients that
> they need to perform a DownOperation -- it uses a small pub/sub server on
> notify.syncany.org.
> - 2: The Guava EventBus is a good option if the WatchOperation and the GUI
> were running in the same JVM; it doesn't work across JVMs though, right?
> We'd have to use the WebSocket messages, right? Or am I missing something
> here?!
>

.... Only the daemon and WatchOperation need to run on the same JVM like
this ?

- JVM1 : (daemon + lib) ==> running WatchOperation
- JVM2 : (gui) ==> running GUI only

JVM1 and JVM2 comminicate through webSocket ....


>
>
>> Is it possible to modify NotificationListener way of working to embedded
>> extra information (like a Map<String, Serialisable> of params ?
>>
>>
> Yes, this would be easily possible -- we could send larger messages.
> Especially since all clients share a secret key.
>
> Best,
> Philipp
>  <http://pgp.mit.edu>
>



-- 
Vincent Wiencek
vwiencek@xxxxxxxxx