Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[Feature] Make livesync work entirely through named sockets #932

Closed
Plamen5kov opened this issue Jan 26, 2018 · 2 comments
Closed

[Feature] Make livesync work entirely through named sockets #932

Plamen5kov opened this issue Jan 26, 2018 · 2 comments
Assignees
Labels
Milestone

Comments

@Plamen5kov
Copy link
Contributor

Plamen5kov commented Jan 26, 2018

problem
Livesync isn't reliable on Android API levels above 23.

solution
Implement all communication through named socket, so erroneous behavior is avoided.

details
expected behavior
Files that are pushed from the client to socket are created or deleted on the device, depending on the operation (create || delete)

Protocol:

  • (optional) as soon as server accepts a connection it sends the application name to the connected client. This is done so the client knows it can start sending data safely.

  • create: (operation)(fileNameLength)(fileName)(fileContentLength)(fileContent)
    Example of message sent through socket: 800007./a.txt0000000011fileContent

  • delete: (operation)(fileNameLength)(fileName)
    Example of message sent through socket: 700003./a

Create example explained:

Operation Name Operation File Name Length File Name File Content Length File Content
create: 8 00007 ./a.txt 0000000011 fileContent
delete: 7 00003 ./a
@Plamen5kov Plamen5kov self-assigned this Jan 26, 2018
@Plamen5kov Plamen5kov added this to the 4.0.0 (TBD) milestone Jan 26, 2018
@Plamen5kov
Copy link
Contributor Author

Update: Android runtime implementation is done.
What follows is the CLI integration.

@Plamen5kov Plamen5kov removed this from the 4.0.0 milestone Mar 1, 2018
@Plamen5kov Plamen5kov removed the planned label Mar 5, 2018
@Plamen5kov Plamen5kov removed their assignment Apr 4, 2018
@vtrifonov
Copy link
Contributor

vtrifonov commented May 14, 2018

Related to #828
Related to #929

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants