Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Mac App Store distribution question #262

Open
rivera-ernesto opened this issue Apr 11, 2014 · 8 comments

Comments

@rivera-ernesto
Copy link

commented Apr 11, 2014

Probably a silly question. But what prevents an open source app like Vienna from being distributed on the Mac App Store?

  • Apache license should be fine.
  • An AppleID account. Probably the main problem is who's ID would it be? The license would allow anyone to do it but is there a image/policy problem?

Also an AppleID seems to be preferred for #49.

@rivera-ernesto rivera-ernesto changed the title Mac App Store distribution Mac App Store distribution question Apr 11, 2014

@mstroeck

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented Apr 11, 2014

Yeah, we should probably do that. I'll look into this, as I need to work with the App Store in any case in the near future.

Am 11.04.2014 um 03:33 schrieb Ernesto Rivera notifications@github.com:

Probably a silly question. But what prevents an open source app like Vienna from being distributed on the Mac App Store?

Apache license should be fine.
An AppleID account. Probably the main problem is who's ID would it be? The license would allow anyone to do it but is there a image/policy problem?
Also an AppleID seems to be preferred for #49.


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

@dak180

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

commented Apr 11, 2014

Code signing as it is currently done should work out of the box with the mac app store.
This still leaves the question of how well Vienna plays with the app sandbox.

@barijaona

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

commented Apr 12, 2014

An App Store version would be the best answer to those numerous Vienna clones « publishers » who are blatantly profiting of our open source philosophy.
But I’d like to keep a non App Store version : it speeds development (open betas, faster publication). So, we would have to maintain two targets.

Some parts of Vienna would need to be removed in the App Store version : I think mainly of the Sparkle autoupdate mechanism.

@barijaona

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

commented May 16, 2016

Related : legal actions suggested in #375

@josh64x2

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

commented Nov 26, 2016

App Sandboxing is a good idea for security and will help prevent issues such as #736 in the future. It is very simple to do, we just need to implement the migration as per Apple's guide.

I have tested it without the migration and simple Vienna functionality seems to be fine. Not sure about Apple scripting or the plugins though.

@Eitot

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented Feb 5, 2017

Sparkle seems to be almost ready to support sandboxing too. They have a ui-separation-and-xpc branch (“2.0”) that awaits merging.

@JanX2

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Feb 5, 2017

Thanks for mentioning the state of Sparkle Eitot. Great to know!

@Eitot

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented Jun 20, 2017

(@josh64x2) Just for reference: Migrating an app to a sandbox.

@Eitot Eitot modified the milestone: v3.2.0 Jul 9, 2017

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
7 participants
You can’t perform that action at this time.