5 ms·

The post shot to #1 on HN in no time, because the developer community thinks this rejection, and it's backing policy to be nonsensical.

saagarjha 7y ago
> because the developer community Which is not a homogenous group, both in ideals and for why they'd upvote a submission like this. > this rejection, and it's backing policy to be nonsensical They're different things. I personally think the rejection is perfectly sensical in the context of the backing policy, with which I don't fully agree.
- throwGuardian 7y ago
  You must be chugging the koolaid to believe developers LOVE Apple's policies, or enjoy getting their hard-work rejected by a bot, or getting shamed by an overzealous Apple employee on HN. Developers are homogeneously unappreciative of Apple's treatment of them. They just don't have any leverage, or opportunity to negotiate
  - saagarjha 7y ago
    …you're replying to a comment where I state that I don't fully agree with Apple's policies.
  - arvinsim 7y ago
    Doesn't help that developers still buy their machines. Apple will only listen if it hits their bottom line.
    - simonh 7y ago
      The problem is that flakey software on their platform, that breaks on OS updates and bug fixes annoys users, and thus also hits Apple's bottom line.
  - scarface74 7y ago
    Who are you going to blame when applications start breaking because Apple removes or changes the functionality of a private function? [1] without warning? When you are writing any software that has a public API you should feel no obligation to change the functionality or completely remove a private method without warning. [1] I refuse to call it a private API. An API is public documentation of the inputs and expected behavior of a dependency. It should be a completely black box how that functionality is implemented.
    - throwGuardian 7y ago
      Blame the developer? Which is why, when an app breaks on the Mac store or app store, users pound the app with 1-star reviews. Even if the breakage happened from a platform (iOS or MacOs or Android) bug. This is not Apple "watching out" for the developers, no matter how much you spin it
      - saagarjha 7y ago
        If enough applications break, users are more than likely to blame the "stupid Apple update" rather than their apps.
      - simonh 7y ago
        It's Apple watching out for users.
bdcravens 7y ago
The post shot to #1 because there are a lot of Javascript developers that see Electron as a gateway into apps they would otherwise be unable to develop. There's a lot of interest in whether or not that door closes. Apple's policy towards private APIs has been known for years.
- throwGuardian 7y ago
  In which universe is it good for Apple to roadblock JavaScript (or any other language) developers?
  - bdcravens 7y ago
    You misinterpreted my comment. Apple is roadblocking the use of private APIs, not languages. Or interpreted another way, they're roadblocking frameworks, not languages. This is true whether you're using Javascript, Swift, or C. This rule has been in place for years.
biggestdecision 7y ago
The rejection is legitimate, but it's still a big issue for developers of Electron apps. The fix should happen in Electron if at all possible.

saagarjha 7y ago

> because the developer community Which is not a homogenous group, both in ideals and for why they'd upvote a submission like this. > this rejection, and it's backing policy to be nonsensical They're different things. I personally think the rejection is perfectly sensical in the context of the backing policy, with which I don't fully agree.

throwGuardian 7y ago
You must be chugging the koolaid to believe developers LOVE Apple's policies, or enjoy getting their hard-work rejected by a bot, or getting shamed by an overzealous Apple employee on HN. Developers are homogeneously unappreciative of Apple's treatment of them. They just don't have any leverage, or opportunity to negotiate
- saagarjha 7y ago
  …you're replying to a comment where I state that I don't fully agree with Apple's policies.
- arvinsim 7y ago
  Doesn't help that developers still buy their machines. Apple will only listen if it hits their bottom line.
  - simonh 7y ago
    The problem is that flakey software on their platform, that breaks on OS updates and bug fixes annoys users, and thus also hits Apple's bottom line.
- scarface74 7y ago
  Who are you going to blame when applications start breaking because Apple removes or changes the functionality of a private function? [1] without warning? When you are writing any software that has a public API you should feel no obligation to change the functionality or completely remove a private method without warning. [1] I refuse to call it a private API. An API is public documentation of the inputs and expected behavior of a dependency. It should be a completely black box how that functionality is implemented.
  - throwGuardian 7y ago
    Blame the developer? Which is why, when an app breaks on the Mac store or app store, users pound the app with 1-star reviews. Even if the breakage happened from a platform (iOS or MacOs or Android) bug. This is not Apple "watching out" for the developers, no matter how much you spin it
    - saagarjha 7y ago
      If enough applications break, users are more than likely to blame the "stupid Apple update" rather than their apps.
    - simonh 7y ago
      It's Apple watching out for users.

bdcravens 7y ago

The post shot to #1 because there are a lot of Javascript developers that see Electron as a gateway into apps they would otherwise be unable to develop. There's a lot of interest in whether or not that door closes. Apple's policy towards private APIs has been known for years.

throwGuardian 7y ago
In which universe is it good for Apple to roadblock JavaScript (or any other language) developers?
- bdcravens 7y ago
  You misinterpreted my comment. Apple is roadblocking the use of private APIs, not languages. Or interpreted another way, they're roadblocking frameworks, not languages. This is true whether you're using Javascript, Swift, or C. This rule has been in place for years.

biggestdecision 7y ago

The rejection is legitimate, but it's still a big issue for developers of Electron apps. The fix should happen in Electron if at all possible.