On Feb 25, 2009, at 10:30 AM, Peter Hosey wrote:
On Feb 25, 2009, at 10:27:15, Quinn Taylor wrote:I can understand why using growlnotify from normal apps would be discouraged. However, I've found it useful for providing feedback for Terminal tasks that take a while to complete, such as Ant builds, shell scripts, background tasks, etc.Certainly. That's its purpose.Making growlnotify hard to install doesn't do anyone a favor until/ unless there actually is a "better" way.There is, which is an Installer package. The hard part of that is wrestling with PackageMaker.
So, does this mean that a package installer would be preferable to the devs if someone made it available? If it's just about installing these 2 items (the binary and man page) it should be a fairly short wrestle. OTOH, if the desired result is to include the Extras as optional installs (unselected by default, of course) in the main Growl installer, it would take a tad longer, but would simplify the install process significantly. Is there interest in having a unified installer that allows users to select these options? If so, I might be able to dedicate a few cycles to the cause...
- Quinn
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
