cocoaforge

Does anyone have updates for Leopard then?!?!?

many of us have the software that arrived via fedex this morning...

can we talk about it now? or are we waiting for 1800EDT?

aikidoka wrote: can we talk about it now? or are we waiting for 1800EDT?

Well, as we've said multiple times in the thread. 1800 PST.

ok... silly to me.

why not wait until 1800HDT?


lmao

aikidoka wrote:ok... silly to me.

why not wait until 1800HDT?


lmao

That's true.

Let's wait until then.

I have no problems running Growl on Leopard.

Growl runs fine on Leopard.

Canonical reference: http://forums.cocoaforge.com/viewtopic.php?p=97685

In 10.4 Growl preference pane would not load. I did an archive and install when I upgraded to 10.5 yesterday and the pref pane still will not install. Sometimes its blank, others it looks like it's hanging when trying to load.

I removed pref pane from /Library and ~/Library then did a fresh Growl 1.1 install.

Any ideas or should I just wait until next version?

relaxedguy wrote:I removed pref pane from /Library and ~/Library then did a fresh Growl 1.1 install.

It should only be in a single location, not both.

Understood, pref pane lives under ~/Library.

Found this in Console:

10/29/07 12:23:48 PM System Preferences[1461] *** Assertion failure in -[NSTextFieldCell _objectValue:forString:errorDescription:], /SourceCache/AppKit/AppKit-949/AppKit.subproj/NSCell.m:1338

0/29/07 12:23:48 PM System Preferences[1461] Invalid parameter not satisfying: aString != nil

Disclosing whether Growl functions or not could disclose an api change. Logically this could be considered an NDA violation. please resepect logic+truth.

Not trying to be nit-picky here and I know the issue is moot now, but I thought I'd shed some light for future situations. Verifying that your app is compatible with an upcoming OS under NDA is not in violation of that NDA. I see the logical connection you're trying to make, but it's okay to do this. The major software companies (when interviewed and sometimes just on their sites) openly discussed their Leopard compatibility plans with news organizations.

But more importantly this issue specifically even came up in the ADC discussions I was involved in and the direct message from Apple to us was that it's fine to divulge that information.

I do respect your decision to be overly safe with the timing. I think people just read the initial responses (as I did) as though your hands were tied, not as though it was a decision you guys were making based on your interpretation.

This may help when making future decisions. Just trying to help. All the best.

timberfish wrote:

Disclosing whether Growl functions or not could disclose an api change. Logically this could be considered an NDA violation. please resepect logic+truth.

Not trying to be nit-picky here and I know the issue is moot now, but I thought I'd shed some light for future situations. Verifying that your app is compatible with an upcoming OS under NDA is not in violation of that NDA. I see the logical connection you're trying to make, but it's okay to do this. The major software companies (when interviewed and sometimes just on their sites) openly discussed their Leopard compatibility plans with news organizations.

But more importantly this issue specifically even came up in the ADC discussions I was involved in and the direct message from Apple to us was that it's fine to divulge that information.

I do respect your decision to be overly safe with the timing. I think people just read the initial responses (as I did) as though your hands were tied, not as though it was a decision you guys were making based on your interpretation.

This may help when making future decisions. Just trying to help. All the best.

We can't just go and do things based on this. We'd need them to post on their site or communicate in a better way that it's ok to do things like this.

We can't just go and do things based on this. We'd need them to post on their site or communicate in a better way that it's ok to do things like this.

I understand that. You guys want to be careful and I get it. They could certainly be more clear about the little details. Just thought I'd share what they said to my team, but I know you can't make big decisions based on a forum contributor

Cheers.