Leopard-compatible GrowlMail: Official beta now released

[Peter Hosey]

1.1.3b1: http://growl.info/beta.html

Some notes:

1. THIS IS BETA. There probably still are bugs. Please report them in
this thread.
2. Please read all messages in this thread before reporting a bug.
Somebody may have found it before you. In this case, there is no need
to say “I have that bug, too” unless we ask.
3. If it crashes, send us Home/Library/Logs/CrashReporter/
Mail.crash.log.
4. It works on both Tiger and Leopard.
5. To get the source code:

svn co -r4760 svn://src.growl.info/growl/trunk/

[Evan Schoenberg]

On Jan 23, 2008, at 4:23 PM, Peter Hosey wrote:

1.1.3b1: http://growl.info/beta.html

When we release this, I suggest that we release "Growl 1.1.3" with this as the only changed component.  Doing otherwise invites a lot of versioning confusion.

GrowlMail 1.1.3b1 installed well for me (including quitting Mail for me since it was running) and is working fine on 10.5.1.

-Evan

[Malcolm Jarvis]

Crash when I received a mail in the background.

Crashlog is at http://pastebin.com/m6091d819

//~ Gimp

[Evan Schoenberg]

Malcolm, does this happen every time?

On Jan 23, 2008, at 7:12 PM, Malcolm Jarvis wrote:

Crash when I received a mail in the background.

1. Thread 13 Crashed:
2. 0   libobjc.A.dylib                     0x927b5ff8 objc_msgSend + 24
3. 1   com.growl.GrowlMail                 0x02c625f4 -[Message(GrowlMail) showNotification] + 2924
4. 2   com.apple.Foundation                0x9000cd9c __NSThread__main__ + 1004
5. 3   libSystem.B.dylib                   0x90779bf8 _pthread_start + 316 
6. 
   

Disassembly of -(void)[Message(GrowlMail) showNotification] shows:

---

 +2832 00005598  4800112d bl 0x66c4  -[r3 mailbox]

 +2836 0000559c  7c601b78 or r0,r3,r3

 +2840 000055a0  7fa3eb78 or r3,r29,r29

 +2844 000055a4  7f84e378 or r4,r28,r28

 +2848 000055a8  7c050378 or r5,r0,r0

 +2852 000055ac  48001119 bl 0x66c4  -[r3 containsObject:]

 +2856 000055b0  7c601b78 or r0,r3,r3

 +2860 000055b4  2f800000 cmpwi cr7,r0,0x0

 +2864 000055b8  419e0014 beq cr7,0x55cc

 +2868 000055bc  3c5f0000 addis r2,r31,0x0

 +2872 000055c0  38023910 addi r0,r2,0x3910  New junk mail

 +2876 000055c4  901e006c stw r0,0x6c(r30)

 +2880 000055c8  48000080 b 0x5648

 +2884 000055cc  813e0138 lwz r9,0x138(r30)

 +2888 000055d0  3c5f0000 addis r2,r31,0x0

 +2892 000055d4  38424660 addi r2,r2,0x4660  respondsToSelector:

 +2896 000055d8  81620000 lwz r11,0x0(r2)  respondsToSelector:

 +2900 000055dc  3c5f0000 addis r2,r31,0x0

 +2904 000055e0  384246e8 addi r2,r2,0x46e8  type

 +2908 000055e4  80020000 lwz r0,0x0(r2)  type

 +2912 000055e8  7d234b78 or r3,r9,r9

 +2916 000055ec  7d645b78 or r4,r11,r11

 +2920 000055f0  7c050378 or r5,r0,r0

 +2924 000055f4  480010d1 bl 0x66c4  -[r3 respondsToSelector:]

 +2928 000055f8  7c601b78 or r0,r3,r3

 +2932 000055fc  2f800000 cmpwi cr7,r0,0x0

 +2936 00005600  419e003c beq cr7,0x563c

 +2940 00005604  813e0138 lwz r9,0x138(r30)

 +2944 00005608  3c5f0000 addis r2,r31,0x0

 +2948 0000560c  384246e8 addi r2,r2,0x46e8  type

 +2952 00005610  80020000 lwz r0,0x0(r2)  type

 +2956 00005614  7d234b78 or r3,r9,r9

 +2960 00005618  7c040378 or r4,r0,r0

 +2964 0000561c  480010a9 bl 0x66c4  -[r3 type]

---

which should be the bolded call below:

NSString *notificationName;

if ([self isJunk] || ([[MailAccount junkMailboxUids] containsObject:[self mailbox]])) {

notificationName = NEW_JUNK_MAIL_NOTIFICATION;

} else {

if ([self respondsToSelector:@selector(type)] && [self type] == MESSAGE_TYPE_NOTE) {

notificationName = NEW_NOTE_NOTIFICATION;

} else {

notificationName = NEW_MAIL_NOTIFICATION;

}

at

Message+GrowlMail.m:175

How can that possibly crash?

-Evan

[Malcolm Jarvis]

On Jan 23, 2008, at 16:28, Evan Schoenberg wrote:

> Malcolm, does this happen every time?
>

Yes, I just reproduced it. Got my friend to send me an email.

http://pastebin.ca/870354 <- same info in the crashed thread.

//~ Gimp

[Peter Hosey]

On Jan 23, 2008, at 16:12:16, Malcolm Jarvis wrote:
> Crash when I received a mail in the background.
>
> Crashlog is at http://pastebin.com/m6091d819

This doesn't have line numbers. Are you sure you're using 1.1.3b1? I
built it with the Development configuration, so it should have debug
information.

Perhaps you have two versions of GrowlMail installed at the same time?

[Malcolm Jarvis]

I can only find one copy of GrowlMail.mailbundle on my system, under /
Library/Mail/Bundles .
I had the old semi-private beta thing that was uploaded before, but I
imagine the installer script should have erased that.

Also, I just deleted every existance of growlmail that I could find,
re-downloaded from beta.growl.info, and re-installed, then made it
crash again.

//~ Gimp

[Peter Hosey]

On Jan 23, 2008, at 17:24:13, Malcolm Jarvis wrote:
> Also, I just deleted every existance of growlmail that I could
> find, re-downloaded from beta.growl.info, and re-installed, then
> made it crash again.

Can you pastebin that, just to make sure?

[Malcolm Jarvis]

Just noticed another console message that had been occuring that I
didn't see:
23/01/08 17:28:49 Mail[21728] Error loading /Library/Mail/Bundles/
GrowlMail.mailbundle/Contents/Frameworks/Growl.framework/Growl:
dlopen(/Library/Mail/Bundles/GrowlMail.mailbundle/Contents/Frameworks/
Growl.framework/Growl, 265): no suitable image found. Did find:
/Library/Mail/Bundles/GrowlMail.mailbundle/Contents/Frameworks/
Growl.framework/Growl: mach-o, but wrong architecture

http://pastebin.ca/870403 <- and theres the most recent crash.

//~ Gimp

[Peter Hosey]

On 2008-01-23, at 17:48, Malcolm Jarvis wrote:
> 23/01/08 17:28:49 Mail[21728] Error loading /Library/Mail/Bundles/
> GrowlMail.mailbundle/Contents/Frameworks/Growl.framework/Growl:
> dlopen(/Library/Mail/Bundles/GrowlMail.mailbundle/Contents/Frameworks/
> Growl.framework/Growl, 265): no suitable image found. Did find:
> /Library/Mail/Bundles/GrowlMail.mailbundle/Contents/Frameworks/
> Growl.framework/Growl: mach-o, but wrong architecture

That's probably it, then. Looks like we're doing a beta 2.

I'm going to see if I can get us some line numbers, or at least a more
stable base address, while I'm at it.

[Malcolm Jarvis]

Ah, yeap, just double checked. it seems that executable is intel only.
(I'm on a G4)

Hey, at least you can be glad its just a minor thing like that, and
not some random other crash.

//~ Gimp

[bgannin]

On Jan 23, 2008, at 3:37 PM, Evan Schoenberg wrote:

On Jan 23, 2008, at 4:23 PM, Peter Hosey wrote:

1.1.3b1: http://growl.info/beta.html

When we release this, I suggest that we release "Growl 1.1.3" with this as the only changed component.  Doing otherwise invites a lot of versioning confusion.

Why is there confusion? Growl 1.1.3 will be beta'ed when ready with a changeset [that's not quite yet] and both will be released when the beta cycle is deemed complete. I don't see a reason to isolate an entire release to this extra. Please explain. 

- brian 'bgannin' ganninger

[Evan Schoenberg]

So your plan is to hold GrowlMail with Leopard support until the next version of Growl is ready, I guess. I'm of the differing opinion that we've already waited longer than was necessary to get to where we are - the growlmail branch has been both stable and unchanged for a while - and that given the nearly automatic nature of a release it makes little sense to delay further. 

Mail is one of the few apps that a vast majority of our users all run. We -have- the leopard fix; why not release early and release often?

Cheers,

Evan

[bgannin]

On Jan 23, 2008, at 7:17 PM, Evan Schoenberg wrote:

So your plan is to hold GrowlMail with Leopard support until the next version of Growl is ready, I guess. I'm of the differing opinion that we've already waited longer than was necessary to get to where we are - the growlmail branch has been both stable and unchanged for a while - and that given the nearly automatic nature of a release it makes little sense to delay further. 

Mail is one of the few apps that a vast majority of our users all run. We -have- the leopard fix; why not release early and release often?

Cheers,

Evan

Because I for one have a limited schedule (as do most others on this team) and our releases have been sporadic and delayed. I don't think time or resources are going to free themselves and as such want to release a "Leopard-compatible Growl" once - not Leopard Growl v.1, Leopard Growl v.2, etc. and deal with mismatched expectations.  We -have- the Leopard fix for GrowlMail, that's essentially it. 

GrowlMail is not a core component, it's a widely consumed extra. It requires extra effort to install and is optional, so I don't feel a terrible pressure to release an official version ASAP. It's rewritten and an extended beta is not an unreasonable assumption for such a release (the repository and your posted build were both offline for a portion of the referenced period.) You state stability, but that's with a limited pool of testers and again I see no reason to rush a 'testing ready' release into the hands of all users simply to assuage support issues [when others will most likely arise.] 

- brian 'bgannin' ganninger

[Chris Forsythe]

On Jan 23, 2008, at 9:52 PM, bgannin wrote:

On Jan 23, 2008, at 7:17 PM, Evan Schoenberg wrote:

So your plan is to hold GrowlMail with Leopard support until the next version of Growl is ready, I guess. I'm of the differing opinion that we've already waited longer than was necessary to get to where we are - the growlmail branch has been both stable and unchanged for a while - and that given the nearly automatic nature of a release it makes little sense to delay further. 

Mail is one of the few apps that a vast majority of our users all run. We -have- the leopard fix; why not release early and release often?

Cheers,

Evan

Because I for one have a limited schedule (as do most others on this team) and our releases have been sporadic and delayed. I don't think time or resources are going to free themselves and as such want to release a "Leopard-compatible Growl" once - not Leopard Growl v.1, Leopard Growl v.2, etc. and deal with mismatched expectations.  We -have- the Leopard fix for GrowlMail, that's essentially it. 

GrowlMail is not a core component, it's a widely consumed extra. It requires extra effort to install and is optional, so I don't feel a terrible pressure to release an official version ASAP. It's rewritten and an extended beta is not an unreasonable assumption for such a release (the repository and your posted build were both offline for a portion of the referenced period.) You state stability, but that's with a limited pool of testers and again I see no reason to rush a 'testing ready' release into the hands of all users simply to assuage support issues [when others will most likely arise.] 

The counter to all of this is that (at least, the part about not releasing for just GrowlMail), for the most part, the support issues we've had have overwhelmingly been for GrowlMail on leopard of the last month.

Peter has been great at responding to user issues, and he and Evan have been maintaining the plugin. Once the plugin has been thoroughly vetted through a beta process, I wouldn't be opposed to just it justifying 1.1.3 just to get our support requests down to something a bit more manageable for everyone's limited time. However, the main problem I am seeing here is a lack of communication and a lack of focus.

So, let's look at the two issues:

Communication

I believe the main problem here is that we:

a) Do not have trac up to communicate things properly. I'm going to work on this asap.

b) Need to communicate better what the goals of each release are.

c) If something is blocking a release on your plate, but others are pushing for a release (ya, I know, I'm picking on you here Brian, sorry :)), then we probably need that list of blocking issues out in the open (that's partially my fault with trac).

Focus

a) We need to figure out what the focus of each release is. Right now, Extras are tied to major releases, so we have to consider them part of the whole and not as secondary products, especially GrowlMail and HardwareGrowler, since those are the apps I see in the wild the most and others have spoken about here the most (that's my perception at least).

b) We need to start limiting the amount of issues to get into a release, to push them out a bit more. Beta time doesn't take much from development, releases tend to be easy-ish to handle from a support standpoint, and overall it just helps us out to get more releases out there imho.

c) If the part about Growl Extras not being a part of the whole with Growl, then we should do 1 of 2 things:

c1) Ditch them. If it's not worth our time to push updates when we need to for them, then we should just ditch them, let someone else maintain them externally from the project, or someone related to the project, just keep it separate from Growl.

c2) Split them off from the Growl dmg, and release separately. Or ship them built into the prefpane, and update via appcast tech or something else similar and manage them through the prefpane (yes, I know, I said no to this 2+ years ago). If these are lesser things, then they need a different release schedule, so we aren't tying something as prolific as Growl to something used by a subsection of our user base.

We have to remember not only that we have a responsibility to all of the great third parties who have added support for Growl, but also to our users and really ourselves. Every time I see a GrowlMail Leopard broken requests I kind of cringe a little bit, and I keep thinking back to the focus topic.

So, questions for everyone:

1) To you, what's holding back 1.1.3?

2) From 1-10, how much do you care about your answer to 1?

I think answering this will get everyone on the same page. I'm also sure that Evan is going to have a different answer than Brian (which is a good thing).

To me, what's holding back 1.1.3 is any other Leopard fixes. We should have a single release out soon with all of the Leopard fixes that can be fit into a 2-3 week period. This should give us time to complete the transition of the website to the new design as well, and should give us time to vet the fixes for 10.5 through a beta process to do a release at the end of February.

However, I could also see the GrowlMail fixes being worth pushing out as 1.1.3, and then making 1.1.4 just for Leopard, and 1.1.5 being the final 1.1.x release fixing all localization issues leftover.

On a scale of 1 to 10, my need to push a GrowlMail update before the end of February is about an 8, whereas my wanting to fix things like Spaces issues is a 2 or a 3, based solely on the fact that we get a ton of bug reports for GrowlMail, and then only curious people asking us to get Growl to work on multiple spaces as a feature request type request.

Does this sort of make sense to everyone, or am I just misreading everything I'm seeing here?

Chris

[Peter Hosey]

On Jan 23, 2008, at 17:52:08, Peter Hosey wrote:
> That's probably it, then. Looks like we're doing a beta 2.

Now available:

http://growl.info/beta.html

Source code is r4762 of trunk.

[bgannin]

On Jan 23, 2008, at 9:52 PM, Chris Forsythe wrote:
>
> So, questions for everyone:
>
> 1) To you, what's holding back 1.1.3?
>
> 2) From 1-10, how much do you care about your answer to 1?
>
> I think answering this will get everyone on the same page. I'm also
> sure that Evan is going to have a different answer than Brian (which
> is a good thing).

Shorthand answer because I need to go to work right now -

1) Spaces not being respected, growlnotify not working correctly,
garbage-collected framework variant testing

2) 0. I don't care either way, it's the will of the community as I see
it. If we decide to push it, fine. My real problem is that we keep
coming up with reasons to let something slip and I'm getting
aggravated watching it happen. With this proposal we'll have gone
through 4+ releases in which localization has been pushed off and left
incomplete, and that's simply a single instance. I don't want to get
comfortable with such a practice, I find slippage to be bad.

> To me, what's holding back 1.1.3 is any other Leopard fixes. We
> should have a single release out soon with all of the Leopard fixes
> that can be fit into a 2-3 week period. This should give us time to
> complete the transition of the website to the new design as well,
> and should give us time to vet the fixes for 10.5 through a beta
> process to do a release at the end of February.
>

That, essentially, is what I'm arguing for (and have been, whether
articulated well or not.)

- brian 'bgannin' ganninger

[thomas zimmermann]

I also had crashing issues like Malcom Jarvis. With the beta 2 version
they are gone, but GrowlMail doesn't work at all. No notifications
occure and the prefpane in Mail doesn't open. I'm running 10.5.1 on a
G4.

[Peter Hosey]

On Jan 24, 2008, at 01:56:13, thomas zimmermann wrote:
> I also had crashing issues like Malcom Jarvis. With the beta 2
> version they are gone, but GrowlMail doesn't work at all.

That's because the beta 2 version fixed it.

As I said at the beginning of the thread:

[thomas zimmermann]

> As I said at the beginning of the thread:> 2. Please read all messages in this thread before reporting a bug.
> > Somebody may have found it before you. In this case, there is no
> > need to say "I have that bug, too" unless we ask.

Rigth, but GrowlMail Beta 2 is NOT running at all on my system. So no
repost of an existing problem, just a new problem with the beta 2.
Talking 'bout the previous bug, was just to strike out, that the
crashing issue is fixed.

thomas

[Rudy Richter]

I think we should consider looking at splitting major extras like GrowlMail off as separate downloads.  As it is people already confuse these kinds of extras with Growl itself and we end up wasting energy just to get them to say that they aren't getting notifications from Mail.app anymore.  I don't think we should necessarily hold up GrowlMail just because Growl itself isn't ready to be released yet.

-rudy

[Peter Hosey]

On Jan 24, 2008, at 01:56:13, thomas zimmermann wrote:

> the prefpane in Mail doesn't open.

What do you mean by this?

[Peter Hosey]

On Jan 24, 2008, at 09:33:53, Rudy Richter wrote:
> I think we should consider looking at splitting major extras like
> GrowlMail off as separate downloads.

Take it to a new thread, please.

[thomas zimmermann]

> What do you mean by this?

The preferences of GrowlMail in Mail do not open.

[Evan Schoenberg]

On Jan 24, 2008, at 1:54 PM, thomas zimmermann wrote:

>
>
>> What do you mean by this?
>
> The preferences of GrowlMail in Mail do not open.

Do you have any output to the Console when loading Mail and then
attempting to show the GrowlMail preference pane? Run /Applications/
Utilities/Console.app.

-Evan

[Peter Hosey]

On Jan 24, 2008, at 10:54:11, thomas zimmermann wrote:
>> What do you mean by this?
>
> The preferences of GrowlMail in Mail do not open.

You said that already. Please be more specific about what you are
doing and what happens instead.

[thomas zimmermann]

>
> Do you have any output to the Console when loading Mail and then  
> attempting to show the GrowlMail preference pane?  Run /Applications/
> Utilities/Console.app.

24.01.08 21:37:53 Mail[1849] Loaded GPGMail d50 (Leopard)
24.01.08 21:37:59 Mail[1849] Using Growl.framework 1.1.2 (1.1.2)
24.01.08 21:37:59 Mail[1849] Loaded GrowlMail 1.1.3b2
24.01.08 21:38:03 Mail[1849] could not create DOMRange for {661, 27}

No specific output when i try to open preference pane.

[Evan Schoenberg]

I didn't mean to imply that we should be lax in appropriate testing for GrowlMail; only that doing so and -then- making whatever growl core changes are desired and -then- running that through a beta period is likely going to take a long time. Pairing the two processes doesn't seem necessary.

Cheers,

Evan

[Evan Schoenberg]

In what language does Mail run for you?

Cheers,
Evan

On Jan 24, 2008, at 3:44 PM, thomas zimmermann

[thomas zimmermann]

On 24 Jan., 22:44, Evan Schoenberg <eva...@dreskin.net> wrote:
> In what language does Mail run for you?
>
> Cheers,
> Evan

German.

thomas

[thomas zimmermann]

I click on the GrowlMail button in the preference pane, then the
header of the pref pane cahgnes to GrowlMail but the content remains,
e.g. i am on rules, then click on GrowlMail --> the header changes but
i remain at the rules window.

[Evan Schoenberg]

Thanks. Fixed for b3 in [4764].

-Evan

[Jyrki]

I'm having this, too - or I don't know whether it's the same issue or
another. I quitted Mail, installed 1.1.3b2 and the preference panel
doesn't even show up in the Mail.app's preferences.

-jyrki

[Evan Schoenberg]

On Jan 31, 2008, at 8:25 AM, Jyrki wrote:

> I'm having this, too - or I don't know whether it's the same issue or
> another. I quitted Mail, installed 1.1.3b2 and the preference panel
> doesn't even show up in the Mail.app's preferences.

Presumably Mail does not run in English for you?

-Evan

[Jyrki]

True. I'm running OS X in Finnish. Now GrowlMail works, after running
these two commands (from TUAW)
defaults write com.apple.mail EnableBundles -bool YES
defaults write com.apple.mail BundleCompatibilityVersion -int 3

-jyrki

[Tim DiLauro]

I had a similar problem, but it seems to have not been related to this
release. When I go to Mail Preferences, I did not see a label for
GrowlMail or several other Mail bundles I had installed. It turned
out that the culprit was Daylite 3 Mail Integration (DMI) bundle
(version 2.1). I discovered this by selectively removing bundles
until the problem disappeared and then adding all but DMI back into
the mix, once I suspected it. After doing so, the preferences for all
the other apparently missing bundles reappeared in the Preferences
window.

There may be other bundles that misbehave similarly.

Also, I should note that the DMI license had expired, which may or may
not have caused this symptom. Either way, it's bad behavior.

~Tim