On May 19, 5:43 pm, Christopher Forsythe <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 11:07 AM, sourcehound <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On May 19, 8:54 am, Derik DeLong <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Not that I should butt in, but I don't see the point of disallowing > > > users from using Growl with applications other than the whitelisted > > > applications. I could understand an admin wanting a white list that > > > limits the number of Growl alerts, reducing user tickets. > > > > However, if a Growl supporting application is installed in the system > > > (which I would expect would require administrator access to install in > > > the first place), what's the reasoning behind restricting a user from > > > viewing its Growl alerts? > > > Like I said, it doesn't really matter because with the whitelist in > > place, if an admin wants to block access to Growl entirely but > > maintain the white listed alerts, it's just a matter of blocking > > access to the Growl Preference Pane, which is trivial and takes the > > burden off of the Developers, leaving it up to the admin to decide > > whether they want the user to be able to configure more Growl > > settings. So no, I don't disagree with you Derik. However, I would > > advocate that the whitelist allow for setting the alert style and > > stickiness so that if the admin does decide to block access to the > > Growl System Preference Pane they can also ensure that the alerts are > > consistent from user to user (or that they can change the style or > > stickiness centrally without having to touch each machine). > > > As far as apps that support Growl being installed by an admin - let's > > just say that some apps support Growl alerts in a meaningful way, > > others in an annoying and distracting way (this is all subjective of > > course). All it takes is one essential app with a poor Growl > > implementation (Adobe) and therefore it's easy to turn thumbs down on > > Growl as a whole. > > All it takes is one overzealous admin to make the wrong choice and annoy 500 > end users, who would then have 0 control to turn it off themselves or change > things, per what you are advocating. > > The problem can go both ways. > > Chris
That is really besides the point. If an admin screws up, it's their fault. Not Growl's fault. If an admin removes Growl from their computers because they screwed up, then that's their choice as a result of their incompetence. If someone else - either an end user or a vendor introduces something that triggers Growl alerts the admin doesn't want, Growl will be removed or not included on the next standard image. Philosophical arguments aside, I am seeing here a resistance to giving admins complete control. I really don't understand why. But it doesn't matter. Why doesn't it matter? As a admin on a managed system, I already have the tools to stop the end user from managing / setting Growl alerts. There's nothing the Growl Dev Team can do to stop it. I can simply deny access to the Growl System Preference pane. So I concede that part of the argument. The Growl Dev team can implement a whitelist while letting the end user override it in any way, shape or form. But please, please, allow the white list to also specify alert style and stickiness settings. However, if at some point I want to remove a registered app, or change the alerts style for one app, I don't want to have to reimage all of my machines or touch them all with a script. Changing the managed preferences on the server would alter the whitelist and all of the installed Growl instances would then change their behavior on the next login or reboot. That's a GOOD thing. That's not something Adobe or any other vendor can override, even though their products are installed with local admin access, it is only for the machine, not the directory where the settings are managed. So as far as I'm concerned, if you implement the white list, I will have my cake. As far as a defaults command or end user overrides go, do what you will. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Growl Discuss" group. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected]. > For more options, visit this group > athttp://groups.google.com/group/growldiscuss?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Growl Discuss" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/growldiscuss?hl=en.
