Comments on: Rethinking Sparkle 1.5 and Sparkle 2 http://andymatuschak.org/feeder/?FeederAction=clicked&feed=Articles+%28RSS2%29&seed=http%3A%2F%2Fandymatuschak.org%2Farticles%2F2007%2F12%2F21%2Frethinking-sparkle-15-and-sparkle-2%2F&seed_title=Rethinking+Sparkle+1.5+and+Sparkle+2 Flying through the universe of code on a talking spaceship! Fri, 21 Nov 2008 19:06:04 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.2.3 By: Alex Celeste http://andymatuschak.org/feeder/?FeederAction=clicked&feed=Articles+%28RSS2%29&seed=http%3A%2F%2Fandymatuschak.org%2Farticles%2F2007%2F12%2F21%2Frethinking-sparkle-15-and-sparkle-2%2F&seed_title=Rethinking+Sparkle+1.5+and+Sparkle+2#comment-6167 Alex Celeste Tue, 29 Jan 2008 01:53:45 +0000 http://andymatuschak.org/feeder/?FeederAction=clicked&feed=Articles+%28RSS2%29&seed=http%3A%2F%2Fandymatuschak.org%2Farticles%2F2007%2F12%2F21%2Frethinking-sparkle-15-and-sparkle-2%2F&seed_title=Rethinking+Sparkle+1.5+and+Sparkle+2#comment-6167 An idea for deploying updates to the Sparkle.framework would be to simply use that Test App of yours to send the new frameworks out. I don't know how feasible it really is, but I thought I'd just throw the idea out there. An idea for deploying updates to the Sparkle.framework would be to simply use that Test App of yours to send the new frameworks out. I don’t know how feasible it really is, but I thought I’d just throw the idea out there.

]]> By: Andy Matuschak http://andymatuschak.org/feeder/?FeederAction=clicked&feed=Articles+%28RSS2%29&seed=http%3A%2F%2Fandymatuschak.org%2Farticles%2F2007%2F12%2F21%2Frethinking-sparkle-15-and-sparkle-2%2F&seed_title=Rethinking+Sparkle+1.5+and+Sparkle+2#comment-4808 Andy Matuschak Fri, 21 Dec 2007 18:43:50 +0000 http://andymatuschak.org/feeder/?FeederAction=clicked&feed=Articles+%28RSS2%29&seed=http%3A%2F%2Fandymatuschak.org%2Farticles%2F2007%2F12%2F21%2Frethinking-sparkle-15-and-sparkle-2%2F&seed_title=Rethinking+Sparkle+1.5+and+Sparkle+2#comment-4808 Yes, David, that's exactly what I'm thinking. Throwing away the whole codebase is silly; it just needs major refactoring to be properly extensible. Also unit testing. Yes, David, that’s exactly what I’m thinking. Throwing away the whole codebase is silly; it just needs major refactoring to be properly extensible.

Also unit testing.

]]> By: David Smith http://andymatuschak.org/feeder/?FeederAction=clicked&feed=Articles+%28RSS2%29&seed=http%3A%2F%2Fandymatuschak.org%2Farticles%2F2007%2F12%2F21%2Frethinking-sparkle-15-and-sparkle-2%2F&seed_title=Rethinking+Sparkle+1.5+and+Sparkle+2#comment-4807 David Smith Fri, 21 Dec 2007 18:12:58 +0000 http://andymatuschak.org/feeder/?FeederAction=clicked&feed=Articles+%28RSS2%29&seed=http%3A%2F%2Fandymatuschak.org%2Farticles%2F2007%2F12%2F21%2Frethinking-sparkle-15-and-sparkle-2%2F&seed_title=Rethinking+Sparkle+1.5+and+Sparkle+2#comment-4807 Are you familiar with second system syndrome? "Merely" improving the guts of Sparkle 1.x with better version handling and differential updating would be a huge step forward with none of the philosophical conundrums attached. Properly encapsulated, all the code could be reused for Sparkle 2 once it gets going. Are you familiar with second system syndrome? “Merely” improving the guts of Sparkle 1.x with better version handling and differential updating would be a huge step forward with none of the philosophical conundrums attached. Properly encapsulated, all the code could be reused for Sparkle 2 once it gets going.

]]>