3 ms·

As a FOSS developer I wish I could notarize it without paying $100/year to Apple.

by ris58h 4y ago

sbuk 4y ago
You'd need a separate certificate, which at the moment will cost considerably more than $100. Also is your objection the $100 or merely paying Apple?
- samoit 4y ago
  Having to notarize your own software is giving one company total control over you and your future. It is unacceptable. I do not develop versions for macosx since notarization anymore.
  - oleks637 4y ago
    This is probably my biggest fear. One day Apple can revoke my certificate, and suddenly my apps stop working for everyone.
    - ryandrake 4y ago
      But this has not happened. You're basing a decision today on something that might or might not happen in the future. "One day," Apple could do anything. One day, they could totally prevent installing things that are not notarized. One day, they could entirely prevent non-AppStore, non-sandboxed applications from running on macOS. They haven't, but they could and indeed all signs point to these being on the very long-term roadmap. Does this mean you stop writing Mac apps today?
      - lapcat 4y ago
        > But this has not happened. This has in fact happened: https://blog.charliemonroe.net/a-day-without-business/ https://blog.charliemonroe.net/a-day-without-business/
        mike_hearn 4y ago
        In fairness it happened then unhappened due to a mistake. I think people are more worried about the sort of semi-arbitrary decision making associated with the App Store. But, to their credit, the macOS team have never used Gatekeeper that way. It's been >10 years that I've been reading predictions that they will, but they never did. That must count for something.
- ris58h 4y ago
  My app uses private API so it can't be distributed via AppStore due to Apple's policy. So in my case I would pay only for certificate and no other benefits. I've already spent tens of hours of my life developing the app and I don't want to add $100 payment every year to it.

As a FOSS developer I wish I could notarize it without paying $100/year to Apple.

by ris58h 4y ago

As a FOSS developer I wish I could notarize it without paying $100/year to Apple.

sbuk 4y ago

You'd need a separate certificate, which at the moment will cost considerably more than $100. Also is your objection the $100 or merely paying Apple?

samoit 4y ago
Having to notarize your own software is giving one company total control over you and your future. It is unacceptable. I do not develop versions for macosx since notarization anymore.
- oleks637 4y ago
  This is probably my biggest fear. One day Apple can revoke my certificate, and suddenly my apps stop working for everyone.
  - ryandrake 4y ago
    But this has not happened. You're basing a decision today on something that might or might not happen in the future. "One day," Apple could do anything. One day, they could totally prevent installing things that are not notarized. One day, they could entirely prevent non-AppStore, non-sandboxed applications from running on macOS. They haven't, but they could and indeed all signs point to these being on the very long-term roadmap. Does this mean you stop writing Mac apps today?
    - lapcat 4y ago
      > But this has not happened. This has in fact happened: https://blog.charliemonroe.net/a-day-without-business/ https://blog.charliemonroe.net/a-day-without-business/
      - mike_hearn 4y ago
        In fairness it happened then unhappened due to a mistake. I think people are more worried about the sort of semi-arbitrary decision making associated with the App Store. But, to their credit, the macOS team have never used Gatekeeper that way. It's been >10 years that I've been reading predictions that they will, but they never did. That must count for something.
ris58h 4y ago
My app uses private API so it can't be distributed via AppStore due to Apple's policy. So in my case I would pay only for certificate and no other benefits. I've already spent tens of hours of my life developing the app and I don't want to add $100 payment every year to it.