3 ms·

Clearing up the confusion around Growl 1.3.

17 points by zbowling 15y ago

dotBen 15y ago
If Growl is going to remain Open Source, as the note says, then someone should really compile a free version from the google code repository and give folks the option to buy it in the App Store or download the community version. Although I've taken this opportunity to remove Growl and my productivity is better for it
- pinko 15y ago
  https://bitbucket.org/pmetzger/growl/ https://bitbucket.org/pmetzger/growl/ A patched version of the popular "growl" notification system for Mac OS X, which compiles cleanly under XCode 4.1 and produces binaries for Mac OS 10.7 "Lion". It also fixes a bad crash in HardwareGrowler. This is forked from the 1.2.x sources I got from growl.info
  - gks 15y ago
    This isn't the same thing as 1.3 is it? It's just the older 1.2 code that was updated by pmetzger to compile and function properly on Lion. In other words, this != 1.3 right?
    - nolanw 15y ago
      Right.
- shiven 15y ago
  I have built and am using ver 1.3.1 growl, growltunes, capster and hardwaregrowler from source (hg clone https://code.google.com/p/growl/ https://code.google.com/p/growl/) on Lion 10.7.2 compiled with Xcode 4.1 . All growl (& apps) seem to be working great over the last two days since installation.
  - dotBen 15y ago
    Seeing as you've already compiled the binary from the 1.3.1 tree, would you be willing to distribute it?
    - shiven 15y ago
      I can certainly do so. However, IANAL and do not know if distributing the compiled binaries would be in violation of any legalese/laws. Maybe you could look into the distribution part? Please check email at the address in your HN profile.
      - deleted 15y ago
        [deleted]
      - dotBen 15y ago
        It's New BSD License, so yes binaries can be distributed as long as all the legal/copyright info is maintained http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BSD_licenses#3-clause_license_.28.22New_BSD_License.22_or_.22Modified_BSD_License.22.29 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BSD_licenses#3-clause_license_.... And I see you just emailed it to me - thanks!
- zbowling 15y ago
  Hey Ben! I'm actually helping out the growl team work towards 1.4. That's entirely an option. This model is similar to Textmate and XChat which remain open source but if you want to download the binary version you can either pay for them a well tested version from a trusted source to help support the project or find any number of the third party builds from questionable sources. Paying the $2 gives you unlimited updates forever in the store and helps support a full time dev working on the project is all. Growl is used by thousands but is maintained by 4ish people people (and now me) in their free time and it doesn't get the attention it needs. (On another note, we should grab a drink sometime! Haven't ran into you in months!)
  - dotBen 15y ago
    Absolutely, people should definitely support the software if they use + enjoy it. As you'll note from my parent comment, I carefully wrote: "and give folks the option to buy it in the App Store or download the community version." I intentionally framed this about empowering everyone to exercise the choice afforded to them under the New BSD License rather than specifically saying "just get it for free", etc. Yes, we should definitely catch up sometime soon :) EDIT: also just to point out: "or find any number of the third party builds from questionable sources" You know, if you guys offered a free, open source community edition then folks wouldn't need to obtain the build from a 'questionable source'. Just sayin' ;). You could even just provide official MD5 Checksums for the binary of the compilation of undoctored code from the current release. That would help people know there were no 'added backdoors'/malware etc in the software obtained from a 3rd party.
- shiven 15y ago
  Hi Ben and fellow HNers, The latest build of Growl 1.3.1 sources off of https://code.google.com/p/growl/ https://code.google.com/p/growl/ compiled on Lion 10.7.2 with Xcode 4.1 is available here: https://www.wuala.com/hncontact/Documents/?key=x8O6uYoaytWi https://www.wuala.com/hncontact/Documents/?key=x8O6uYoaytWi Please read the comment thread from zbowling (http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3221686 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3221686) and please, please do buy Growl 1.3.1 from the app store and support the devs! (Edited to add: I wish you guys had a Donate button for folks, like myself, who do not wish to fill Apple's coffers but would like to support Growl devs nonetheless.)
jey 15y ago
Without changing to this paid Growl model, Growl would have died off and would no longer be around to use at all. Growl is however still Open Source Wonderful non-sequitur.
- cube13 15y ago
  Why? You can sell Free Software. The FSF states that in their FAQ(http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#DoesTheGPLAllowMoney http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#DoesTheGPLAllowMone...). There is absolutely nothing wrong with charging for Growl.
  - jey 15y ago
    It's a non-sequitur to claim that free software "wouldn't exist" unless they charged for it. Programmers can (and often do) contribute to open source software without getting paid for it.
    - kennu 15y ago
      Then again, if nobody maintains a current version that's compatible with the latest OSX and provides automatic updates, you can say that the product "dies off" even if the source code is still out there.
jreposa 15y ago
I thought it was disingenuous that I got prompted to update Growl, which led me to the uninstall script, then asked me to buy through the App Store. I just kind of shrugged and didn't complete the last step. And as dotBen mentioned, my productivity is better for it. If I knew it wasn't a free update, I never would have uninstalled.
- gks 15y ago
  From what I understand it won't work for much longer due to the sandboxing requirements that'll be coming in Lion. So, probably best to uninstall eventually rather than have something there that won't work. (Correct me if I'm wrong here but that was my understanding)
  - jreposa 15y ago
    I do believe that is the case. I'm not questioning the reason for the uninstall. And, just to be clear, I'm not questioning his motives either. I think it's a really useful program and SDK. I just didn't like finding out it was a paid app after I innocently clicked on update and uninstalled. I trusted that I was actually getting an update. I was left without my notifications and a bad taste.
  - namidark 15y ago
    Sandboxing only applies to applications in the App Store -- regular downloaded applications from a website will not have to abide by the sandboxing rules.
  - albertogh 15y ago
    Sandboxing is only required for apps sold in the Mac App Store and the OS won't require apps to be sandboxed. None of your non-sandboxed apps will stop working on March 1st.
dlikhten 15y ago
"Applications can still send notifications via growl api, growl is just like "growl pro"" That is good. I support them for that.
- philwelch 15y ago
  My question is, without Growl, how do I tell those apps to stop sending me notifications?
  - jarin 15y ago
    I imagine it will either be in prefs or via moving the application to the trash can.
  - zacwest 15y ago
    There's both a preference to disable it for an application, which can also be applied globally. Apps can also add a preference to their own app to toggle it. A "Mist enabler/disabler" app should be written to allow you to configure it easily, IMO.
andrewpi 15y ago
Is the source for 1.3 actually posted now? I know it wasn't before.
- zbowling 15y ago
  It's a little slow making it over to google code. It's been up for a while. Bleeding edge work is on a private HG and cloned over to Google nightly (or least it's supposed too). Can always come into #growl on freenode and ask for access the other repo.

17 points by zbowling 15y ago

If Growl is going to remain Open Source, as the note says, then someone should really compile a free version from the google code repository and give folks the option to buy it in the App Store or download the community version. Although I've taken this opportunity to remove Growl and my productivity is better for it

pinko 15y ago
https://bitbucket.org/pmetzger/growl/ https://bitbucket.org/pmetzger/growl/ A patched version of the popular "growl" notification system for Mac OS X, which compiles cleanly under XCode 4.1 and produces binaries for Mac OS 10.7 "Lion". It also fixes a bad crash in HardwareGrowler. This is forked from the 1.2.x sources I got from growl.info
- gks 15y ago
  This isn't the same thing as 1.3 is it? It's just the older 1.2 code that was updated by pmetzger to compile and function properly on Lion. In other words, this != 1.3 right?
  - nolanw 15y ago
    Right.
shiven 15y ago
I have built and am using ver 1.3.1 growl, growltunes, capster and hardwaregrowler from source (hg clone https://code.google.com/p/growl/ https://code.google.com/p/growl/) on Lion 10.7.2 compiled with Xcode 4.1 . All growl (& apps) seem to be working great over the last two days since installation.
- dotBen 15y ago
  Seeing as you've already compiled the binary from the 1.3.1 tree, would you be willing to distribute it?
  - shiven 15y ago
    I can certainly do so. However, IANAL and do not know if distributing the compiled binaries would be in violation of any legalese/laws. Maybe you could look into the distribution part? Please check email at the address in your HN profile.
    - deleted 15y ago
      [deleted]
    - dotBen 15y ago
      It's New BSD License, so yes binaries can be distributed as long as all the legal/copyright info is maintained http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BSD_licenses#3-clause_license_.28.22New_BSD_License.22_or_.22Modified_BSD_License.22.29 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BSD_licenses#3-clause_license_.... And I see you just emailed it to me - thanks!
zbowling 15y ago
Hey Ben! I'm actually helping out the growl team work towards 1.4. That's entirely an option. This model is similar to Textmate and XChat which remain open source but if you want to download the binary version you can either pay for them a well tested version from a trusted source to help support the project or find any number of the third party builds from questionable sources. Paying the $2 gives you unlimited updates forever in the store and helps support a full time dev working on the project is all. Growl is used by thousands but is maintained by 4ish people people (and now me) in their free time and it doesn't get the attention it needs. (On another note, we should grab a drink sometime! Haven't ran into you in months!)
- dotBen 15y ago
  Absolutely, people should definitely support the software if they use + enjoy it. As you'll note from my parent comment, I carefully wrote: "and give folks the option to buy it in the App Store or download the community version." I intentionally framed this about empowering everyone to exercise the choice afforded to them under the New BSD License rather than specifically saying "just get it for free", etc. Yes, we should definitely catch up sometime soon :) EDIT: also just to point out: "or find any number of the third party builds from questionable sources" You know, if you guys offered a free, open source community edition then folks wouldn't need to obtain the build from a 'questionable source'. Just sayin' ;). You could even just provide official MD5 Checksums for the binary of the compilation of undoctored code from the current release. That would help people know there were no 'added backdoors'/malware etc in the software obtained from a 3rd party.
shiven 15y ago
Hi Ben and fellow HNers, The latest build of Growl 1.3.1 sources off of https://code.google.com/p/growl/ https://code.google.com/p/growl/ compiled on Lion 10.7.2 with Xcode 4.1 is available here: https://www.wuala.com/hncontact/Documents/?key=x8O6uYoaytWi https://www.wuala.com/hncontact/Documents/?key=x8O6uYoaytWi Please read the comment thread from zbowling (http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3221686 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3221686) and please, please do buy Growl 1.3.1 from the app store and support the devs! (Edited to add: I wish you guys had a Donate button for folks, like myself, who do not wish to fill Apple's coffers but would like to support Growl devs nonetheless.)

jey 15y ago

Without changing to this paid Growl model, Growl would have died off and would no longer be around to use at all. Growl is however still Open Source Wonderful non-sequitur.

cube13 15y ago
Why? You can sell Free Software. The FSF states that in their FAQ(http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#DoesTheGPLAllowMoney http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#DoesTheGPLAllowMone...). There is absolutely nothing wrong with charging for Growl.
- jey 15y ago
  It's a non-sequitur to claim that free software "wouldn't exist" unless they charged for it. Programmers can (and often do) contribute to open source software without getting paid for it.
  - kennu 15y ago
    Then again, if nobody maintains a current version that's compatible with the latest OSX and provides automatic updates, you can say that the product "dies off" even if the source code is still out there.

jreposa 15y ago

I thought it was disingenuous that I got prompted to update Growl, which led me to the uninstall script, then asked me to buy through the App Store. I just kind of shrugged and didn't complete the last step. And as dotBen mentioned, my productivity is better for it. If I knew it wasn't a free update, I never would have uninstalled.

gks 15y ago
From what I understand it won't work for much longer due to the sandboxing requirements that'll be coming in Lion. So, probably best to uninstall eventually rather than have something there that won't work. (Correct me if I'm wrong here but that was my understanding)
- jreposa 15y ago
  I do believe that is the case. I'm not questioning the reason for the uninstall. And, just to be clear, I'm not questioning his motives either. I think it's a really useful program and SDK. I just didn't like finding out it was a paid app after I innocently clicked on update and uninstalled. I trusted that I was actually getting an update. I was left without my notifications and a bad taste.
- namidark 15y ago
  Sandboxing only applies to applications in the App Store -- regular downloaded applications from a website will not have to abide by the sandboxing rules.
- albertogh 15y ago
  Sandboxing is only required for apps sold in the Mac App Store and the OS won't require apps to be sandboxed. None of your non-sandboxed apps will stop working on March 1st.

dlikhten 15y ago

"Applications can still send notifications via growl api, growl is just like "growl pro"" That is good. I support them for that.

philwelch 15y ago
My question is, without Growl, how do I tell those apps to stop sending me notifications?
- jarin 15y ago
  I imagine it will either be in prefs or via moving the application to the trash can.
- zacwest 15y ago
  There's both a preference to disable it for an application, which can also be applied globally. Apps can also add a preference to their own app to toggle it. A "Mist enabler/disabler" app should be written to allow you to configure it easily, IMO.

andrewpi 15y ago

Is the source for 1.3 actually posted now? I know it wasn't before.

zbowling 15y ago
It's a little slow making it over to google code. It's been up for a while. Bleeding edge work is on a private HG and cloned over to Google nightly (or least it's supposed too). Can always come into #growl on freenode and ask for access the other repo.