On Fri, 7 Oct 2011 10:43:55 -0700 Peter Hosey <[email protected]> wrote: > On Oct 7, 2011, at 07:35:59, Perry E. Metzger wrote: > > The developers did not test the upgrade mechanism well … > > It isn't possible to test MAS upgrading without releasing through > the MAS.
That's not true in practice. > > … and altered the interface between growl and applications … > > This is untrue. The interface that Growl provided to applications > from 1.1 or so onward is still supported. Then why don't old apps continue to work with growl without alteration? The answer is that you altered the interface and are asking all your developers to update their code. > > (claiming it is the fault of app developers for not having all > > upgraded to the new and unreleased framework in advance), > > This is untrue. App developers did not keep up to date with > RELEASED frameworks. Version 1.2.2, the most recent release, when > used correctly, works. Code stays out in the field for years in practice. Unless you know that (almost) everyone has upgraded, you don't change an interface... > > and failed to release any of the auxiliary software like the > > itunes growl addon at the same time. > > They are separate products which the Growl developers announced > previously they will release separately and not at the same time. Thus breaking your users. > > The code is also buggy and crashes for many people. > > I've only seen one crash reported for Growl 1.3 (the > queuing-display crash). I've seen a lot of crash reports in the last few days, and you haven't answered most of them. > > They have also (apparently) taken the code closed source (at > > least for now) so no one can try to fix the problems on their own > > and release fixed versions outside of the Growl developers > > themselves. > > Not for that reason, no. It was because the team (which included me > at the time) worried about export restrictions on encryption code. There are none any longer for open source software. All you have to do is send an email notification of where your code is available to the address provided in the regs and you have no issue at all. Lots of people could have told you that. In any case, it appears all the code for the old systems is with crypto is available online, it is the new code that appears to be missing. > Now, there's no strong encryption in the code anymore (I stripped > it out). I don't know why the current developers haven't reopened > it; it's up to them. They may simply have not had time; they've > certainly had plenty of other work to do on Growl. Usually people do development on open source projects in public repos, which eliminates that entire question. Perry -- Perry E. Metzger [email protected] -- 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.
