I don't see how those statements contradict each other. Growl 1.3 is clearly not open source at this moment, and the stated intend to "push the source over the

I don't see how those statements contradict each other. Growl 1.3 is clearly not open source at this moment, and the stated intend to "push the source over the wall" seems to very deliberately use wording that avoids any kind of commitment on licensing. Never mind the odd reason for not posting the source code at this point, given that the entire infrastructure for this is already in place and used for 1.2. I.e., why should other concerns prevent 1.3 code from being published?