Unfortunately that won't work either. Dropbox doesn't have to read the configuration file at all and can just install by copying the prefpane over. Unless I misread this
On Oct 21, 2010, at 11:07 PM, Phoenix <[email protected]> wrote: > Why not putting a small config file next to the .plist when > uninstalling, which is not being removed with that action. That way, > Growl would see that it had been previously uninstalled and a re- > install would prompt Growl to explicitly prompt the user, who if he > declines adds another line to never ask, but automatically declines > the re-install from that point onwards. Of course, such applications > like Dropbox can erase that file again, but then they really preying > for trouble. > > On Oct 21, 3:17 am, Christopher Forsythe <[email protected]> wrote: >> This sort of thing makes me uncomfortable. >> >> What wouldn't make me uncomfortable is if we had a way to just kill >> notifying if a user uninstalled before, and our pkg installer wasn't >> the thing that reinstalled Growl. But I don't know of a good way to do >> that without other problems we've discussed previously on the list. >> >> Chris >> >> >> >> On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 9:05 PM, Tarun Nagpal <[email protected]> wrote: >>> Chris, >> >>> To get back to the issue: Would it be reasonable to block apps that >>> install Growl surreptitiously? There wouldn't be much of a point of >>> Dropbox installing growl if Growl no longer accepted Dropbox >>> notifications. Obviously they haven't responded to a serious issue and >>> it seems that this sort of punishment would get their attention. Yes >>> it would hurt users, but the long term benefits should be there as >>> they clean up their act. >> >>> On Oct 19, 10:03 am, Christopher Forsythe <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> My apologies for Nicholas taking up a large portion of time and >>>> distracting everyone. He is now banned, as stated in the last email if >>>> he continued on this thread. >> >>>> Chris >> >>>> On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 5:25 AM, Nicholas Sanders <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>>> Chris >>>>> While I don't entirely agree with you, I have tried to understand what you >>>>> are saying from your perspective - an impossible but worthwhile aspiration >>>>> in any circumstances. It is always interesting (if often painful) to learn >>>>> how others see one, and you clearly have a long memory for my defects. >>>>> But if I try to see the world from your side, I think it only fair that >>>>> you >>>>> try to see it from mine. For one thing, it is crystal clear that you have >>>>> no >>>>> inkling at all as to why a mere subscriber might take offence at attacks >>>>> on >>>>> the authors of the software, or that the use of certain terms might pain a >>>>> reader, whoever they are used by and at whom directed. Where I see a >>>>> world I >>>>> only inhabit, you apparently see one which you want to control - no room >>>>> there for diversity of comprehension, sadly. >>>>> Whatever of that, I have at no time attempted to defend, excuse or justify >>>>> my mistake - I have freely admitted it, and apologised for it. What is >>>>> causing me the problem here is that I feel that I am being insulted and >>>>> bullied, and I don't like it. The validity of your case (which I in no way >>>>> dispute) is maligned by your rudeness and your threats, when the most I >>>>> needed from you was your gentle reminder that my sarcastic one liners do >>>>> not >>>>> in fact help anybody's cause. >>>>> I am at least two people - one of them wants simply to apologise and >>>>> promise >>>>> to try never to do something of the kind again, while the other is >>>>> possessed >>>>> by the need to assert that this is not because of being threatened. The >>>>> anger which you hold makes resolution of this dichotomy impossible for me. >>>>> You say that I have no right to be angry about the kind of post that >>>>> initiated this thread, but I am not. I don't think you actually mean >>>>> "right" >>>>> here but, in any case, it is not anger that I have felt or feel now. >>>>> Rather >>>>> is there here another human who has his own life experience (clearly very >>>>> much longer than yours, as it happens), and for whom the issue is rather >>>>> one >>>>> of hurt. And this human feels he has every "right" to be hurt - by the >>>>> original poster, by your intemperate words, by your bullying behaviour. >>>>> I have no clear idea as to why you think you will improve a situation by >>>>> using threats and offensive language but doing so is your choice, just as >>>>> it >>>>> is my choice to continue to discuss the matter in spite of my risking >>>>> being >>>>> banned by doing so. I don't want to be banned, but neither do I want you >>>>> or >>>>> anyone else to think that I accept your threats as a valid basis for my >>>>> behaviour choices. >>>>> My closing position is that you are right that my action was childish (I >>>>> believe I was the first to say so) and you are also right that I have >>>>> erred >>>>> in similar style in the past (which fact may indicate a personality defect >>>>> similar to your own, although I believe we differ on which is actually >>>>> poisonous). You are not right to bully or threaten me, not least because >>>>> to >>>>> do so is as ineffective and pointless as my childish remarks, and >>>>> contradicts your own exhortation to be a nice person too. >>>>> I have already apologised for causing the upset - I do so again now, >>>>> without >>>>> reservation. I will not enter into any contract not to fail in the same >>>>> manner again as long as my doing so is conditioned by fear of the result, >>>>> nor is there any need for me to do so since I have at no time attempted to >>>>> justify this kind of action anyway and wouldn't perform it if I thought >>>>> first. Your threats are empty, not because you won't carry them out but >>>>> because they cannot achieve your purpose. >>>>> If I have anything further to add to the thread, I will do so direct to >>>>> yourself - notwithstanding that you have warned me against doing that too. >>>>> Anyhow, it's late for Eid and early for Thanksgiving - tomorrow is the >>>>> Birthday of the Bab so I wish all readers the most sincere greetings for >>>>> that. >>>>> Nick out… >> >>>>> On 19 Oct 2010, at 00:30, Christopher Forsythe wrote: >> >>>>> Every time I started to type this email, I found myself not being able >>>>> to complete it, so I stepped away. I think you aren't reading what I'm >>>>> saying how I'm thinking it in my head, so I'm going to reiterate it in >>>>> a different manner. After this, this thread needs to die. If you are >>>>> confused, reread this. I will be as clear here as I am ever going to >>>>> be. >> >>>>> When I thought about what kind of user you are to our community. I >>>>> came to the conclusion that you are verging on being a poisonous >>>>> person. Please see >>>>> http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4216011961522818645# if you >>>>> have not seen it already, it's an excellent talk about the type of >>>>> person I think you are verging on becoming. >> >>>>> The reason I say this is due to a pattern in responses which have no >>>>> value, other than to be annoying. Here is a small list I found by just >>>>> searching for about 3 minutes, I stopped looking once I hit 4 emails: >> >>>>> http://groups.google.com/group/growldiscuss/msg/a19a2ff6a84ebdd8 >>>>> http://groups.google.com/group/growldiscuss/msg/872c304048d33e0a >>>>> http://groups.google.com/group/growldiscuss/msg/74b285e15eb9ebf2 >>>>> http://groups.google.com/group/growldiscuss/msg/be17f47730a0cc5f >> >>>>> Some common themes here are: >> >>>>> - Lack of useful responses >>>>> - Sarcasm verging on starting a heated discussion on a thread >>>>> - Short responses >> >>>>> This all said, you do provide some great feedback.When I found you >>>>> provided the best feedback it was about your specific problems though. >> >>>>> You responded to this user first. The user does not have a way to >>>>> differentiate who represents the project, and who is merely a member >>>>> of this mailing list/discussion group. As such, you represented this >>>>> entire group. You did so in a very sarcastic manner, with none of the >>>>> following: >> >>>>> - No quality control. >>>>> - No useful information to help the end user >>>>> - No helping at all >> >>>>> All of this to what end? No good one as far as I'm concerned. So no, I >>>>> do not believe you were wishing him a Merry Christmas. I know you were >>>>> in fact being a prick. Which is why I'm angry at you. You basically >>>>> just gave us a worse name to this user than we already had to him. >>>>> Which isn't a good place for us to be in, seeing how this can all be >>>>> avoided very easily. >> >>>>> Now, instead, you could have taken these actions, and not come across >>>>> as someone who is simply out to make himself feel good for 2 seconds >>>>> for a childish act: >> >>>>> - Responded with the link to the article about this issue >>>>> - Responded saying you understand, and providing details about how >>>>> dropbox is actually doing this, and then how to remove Growl >>>>> - Not responded at all >> >>>>> These 3 responses at the very least would have been more beneficial >>>>> than the response you chose to make. >> >>>>> Since you decided to send your sarcastic email to the list publicly, I >>>>> decided to reprimand you publicly. I will reiterate what I said >>>>> earlier. Do not respond to end users in this manner. They do not >>>>> deserve to be treated like this. We don't either, but their anger is >>>>> just, only not justly directed. You however have no right to be angry >>>>> about it, since it is not affecting you at all. >> >>>>> I spent more time today thinking about this one thing than anything >>>>> else. I have a six month old son who is better behaved than you are on >>>>> this list. I'm not going to sit here and baby sit you, you need to be >>>>> an adult here. I also want this thread to end, unless the original >>>>> poster requires more assistance. However, since this thread was >>>>> derailed, I've already started a direct email with him so he doesn't >>>>> have to continue to deal with this. >> >>>>> I have concluded that this is not acceptable behavior to tolerate for >>>>> these issues. If you respond to another user in a sarcastic manner >>>>> such as this, I will ban you. If you continue to make me have to >>>>> respond to you after being very clear in this email, I will also ban >>>>> you. If you choose to email me or any other member of the Growl >>>>> project directly to complain about this, I will ban you. Basically, >>>>> drop the issue, move on, and don't be a prick in the future, and we're >>>>> all set. >> >>>>> As far as I'm concerned, this should not have been how this user was >>>>> handled. You made us look bad. You need to own up to that, and learn >>>>> from it. I don't want to think about it anymore. >> >>>>> -- >> >>>>> Nicholas J A Sanders >>>>> ___________________ >>>>> semiotek >> >>>>> +44 [0]7092 153 409 >> >> ... >> >> read more » > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Growl Discuss" group. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected]. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/growldiscuss?hl=en. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Growl Discuss" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/growldiscuss?hl=en.
