Noted. I can't say I agree but that's fine - we are where we are. On 8 Nov 2011, at 19:37, Rachel Blackman <[email protected]> wrote:
> That still would've required the rewrite to be done and 1.3 to be released, > or else everything that /was/ already in the MAS would stop working with > Growl. Which wouldn't have made people happy either. > > On Nov 8, 2011, at 11:33 AM, Phat Bob wrote: > >> Or hold off from going into the MAS surely? >> >> On 8 Nov 2011, at 19:15, Rachel Blackman <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> On Nov 8, 2011, at 11:06 AM, Phat Bob wrote: >>> >>>> While I agree and support all this - what frustrates me is that all of >>>> these changes have happened in one hit. >>> >>> Unfortunately, until November 2nd when Apple decided to push out the >>> deadline to March of next year, the official deadline for 'everything has >>> to work with sandboxing' was November 1st. Thus, Growl 1.3 /had/ to do all >>> the sandboxing-related stuff in something of a hurry. >>> >> >> -- >> 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.
