Revisiting Sparkle
Moderators: Eyal Redler, redlers, Ori Redler
Revisiting Sparkle
Just a quick follow up note about automatic updating. This was discussed briefly on this forum last year and the year before, and Ori was looking into it. Recently Jon at Bookends has implemented auto update using the Sparkle framework. I wonder if some of the previous issues preventing this move for Mellel have been dealt with? In any case, I thought I would mention this again, because the feature is so useful. It works like a charm on BE.
Best,
Rick
Best,
Rick
Re: Revisiting Sparkle
I'd really like to see this for Mellel too
Re: Revisiting Sparkle
I, too, wouldn't mind seeing this implemented. But first things first. Sparkle also is more appealing for those applications with frequent updates.
-
- Read the guide, knows everything
- Posts: 50
- Joined: Mon Nov 14, 2005 10:08 am
- Location: The Train between Davis and San Francisco
Re: Revisiting Sparkle
The sarcasm of this last post was, um..., palpable.
Re: Revisiting Sparkle
Is that so?nvalvo wrote:The sarcasm of this last post was, um..., palpable.
Re: Revisiting Sparkle
Is Sparkle compatible with an application that has a licencing duration? Hypothetically if I had registered in March 2006 and used Sparkle to go from 2.0.6 then to 2.2.7.2 in March 2008 them my next auto update put me over the limit is there any way back from there?
Re: Revisiting Sparkle
That's the reason why Sparkle is not yet implemented if I remember correctly.
Reiner
-
- Knows everything, can prove it
- Posts: 120
- Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2006 1:48 pm
- Location: Boskovice, Czech Republic
- Contact:
Re: Revisiting Sparkle
I think this can be handled easily. If Mellel knows how long the license lasts, it can disable the automatic updates when the license expires or display a warning. But discussing new features seems quite pointless right now…
Re: Revisiting Sparkle
Do we really need an updater? I prefer dragging the new version into the Applications directory manually. Even if Mellel was updated more frequently, I would still prefer this means of installation because it's simple and clean. Adding an installer takes development time away from what I would consider more important things in the application itself and is one more piece of code that can go wrong. Sorry if that's not the majority opinion, but I really think we should ditch the idea of having an installer/updater completely.
/s.
/s.
-
- Knows everything, can prove it
- Posts: 120
- Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2006 1:48 pm
- Location: Boskovice, Czech Republic
- Contact:
Re: Revisiting Sparkle
Adding Sparkle is really a trivial task [probably a day, even with the license expiration check] and the automatic update can be turned off by those who would prefer to update by hand. I prefer applications updating themselves – dragging a new version to the Applications folder is indeed an easy task, but with 5–10 applications and monthly updates it gets old pretty soon. We could even make a poll to see if people want automatic updates. But as I already said: There are tons of much more important features to be done right now.
Re: Revisiting Sparkle
Thought I'd post in this thread to bring it up back to the top and in the spotlight again. Both Mellel's main partners (Sente and Bookends) both update with Sparkle and it is fantastic. I'd really like to see Sparkle updating for Mellel.