Hi,
how about the idea to post in the add-on section when I have a new plugin prerelease.
Is that welcome or not?
Greetings
Christian
Last time I tried it, I was directed to send press releases through official channels, where they’ll never get read or discussed. But others seem to be doing informal announcements now. Perhaps the rules have changed?
Hi Christian,
I would like to see new plugin releases promoted here, especially yours. 
Fred
I welcome anyones updates in this forum
I think the prerelease frequency might be a bit much. Perhaps posting when you have a new official (non-developer preview) release is good enough. I think as long as you’re not flooding the channel so that it looks like it’s the MBS forum you will be okay. (Of course others will disagree)
I am not aware of any rules regarding the add-on forms.
Bob, perhaps I’m special, but the last time I did an informal announcement here, I was instructed to send them to PR. When I followed up and asked how to engage users in discussion about it, I got no reply. After alluding to that several times in recent threads on the issue, I still have no reply. And to put that in context, I have PMs chiding me for even suggesting that Christian’s mention of his Sparkle class in a hostile thread wasn’t particularly nefarious.
I don’t think the pre-release frequency is a bit much. 1/3 of the people here use his plugin, far more than the number of people who use a SimWhatever canvas that I can’t even figure out what it does. But he has to sheepishly ask permission for fear of offending a loud contingent who have a philosophical problem with paying for things. That’s just completely jacked up.
I had a proposal that addressed this very issue in a way that should not offend the “every solution must be free” crowd at all. Many derided it as not necessary. And still, here we are. Again.
I do think posting about Release versions of MBS here should be OK and it would allow discussions.
BUT I also think the pre release MBS versions would be a bit much… they are essentially betas and those interested in them can (and should) be on the MBS mailing list IMO.
To be fair, the pre-releases do usually contain new functionality, not just bug fixes.
I’d find it odd if Christian couldn’t at least announce new full releases in this forum channel.
Then again, it’s up to Xojo Inc. If they want all press releases to go through them, that’s their business. Perhaps it would be better to discuss directly with them.
[quote=91196:@Gavin Smith]Then again, it’s up to Xojo Inc. If they want all press releases to go through them, that’s their business. Perhaps it would be better to discuss directly with them.
[/quote]
I’d be happier with consistency. Press releases might be nice for outside the community, but they’re worthless currency inside. People who buy stuff want interaction. And people who don’t buy stuff don’t want to see it. It’s a tough thing to balance, but Xojo needs to do it.
I sort of thought that was the point of having an Add-ons channel… If people don’t want to know about it they can hide the channel… Those of us who do want to see it can Follow the channel.
[quote=91153:@Christian Schmitz]Is that welcome or not?
[/quote]
What if you started a thread for each new release and just post updates about pre-releases in the same thread? I’ve noticed that you’ve been very hesitant to post MBS solutions to questions recently… It kind of makes me sad that the anti-3rd party folks seem to be intimidating us all away from offering paid solutions along with all of the other (free) help out there
I could of course simply put them all in one thread.
So people on the forum could subscribe to it (or hide it).
For official releases, I send Dana the press release, but I prefer actually if people try new features earlier, so I have more feedback before things are released.
I think it should be both-and. This channel should be wide open to discussion about anything plugin, especially pre-release activity. Then a General-channel press release from Dana when it’s officially released. I didn’t think Brad’s suggestion was necessary, but then I don’t have the back-story either. Frankly, the situation seems a little bizarre. I hope all parties will be able to do a “reset” and resolve whatever bad blood seems to be festering in the background.
You could just have a “prerelease” thread as well, so people could mute or follow that if they wanted info on prerelease stuff. I guess it would depend on how often you want to announce a prerelease. But it definitely seems like this would be a good channel to post it in.
Here’s the bad blood. There is a significant contingent of people here, let’s call them “C”, whose panties get in a bunch when another contingent “A” pays a smaller contingent “B” for things that contingent B doesn’t share freely with C. They complain about being advertised to, tricked into buying things they don’t need (because apparently they’re that gullible), and other inanities. Representatives of X (guess who that is) tell Bs to pipe down so as not to offend the delicate sensibilities of the Cs by engaging in commerce in front of them.
Meanwhile, As are continually asking Bs why the Bs don’t publicize what they have or are doing more because the As didn’t know the Bs had such and such which would be extremely useful to them.
The correct solution is for X to tell Cs to chill out and deal with it, because Bs are part of the community too and As are getting their problems solved and are willing to exchange value to do so. I’m not holding my breath on that one at all. So in the absence of basic leadership, we get tentative questions like Christian’s, hoping to not offend “the community” or our hosts by (oh my gods!!!) discussing things that cost money.
But perhaps the most annoying dynamic is when a B posts a solution to a complicated problem that nobody in the C camp would ever figure out or work through, and a C thanks the B for contributing so selflessly to the community, as if the C thinks he might have softened the heart of commercial Grinch.
Happy Saturday.
Here we go again.
[quote=91259:@Gavin Smith]Here we go again.
[/quote]
Gavin, you liked the reply that pre-releases are a bit much and Christian should post elsewhere. I suppose you’ll be complaining about Christian’s little experiment in another post? Of my proposal, you said it wasn’t needed because it could happen in Addons. It’s difficult to figure out where you stand on this.
I liked the first part of Karen’s post. I’m neutral about the second part I don’t particularly care what he or anyone else does in the Add-on section, seems like a fair place for it. It’s up to Xojo Inc. Could they clarify please?
Well, I’ll simply try it and we’ll see what happens.
Xojo Inc. created the Addons section presumably to discuss add ons. Now it would be quite illogical for them not to want add on producers to introduce their product there.
Brad, your alphabetic demonstration is as unclear as Apple’s developer documentation.
Let me see if I understood. I talk about pay for add-ons ; free add-ons are a horse of a different color not concerned in this post.
A are add-ons customers
B are add-ons producers, often self-publishers of their wondrous software accomplishments.
C hate add-ons addons and thrive on finding ways on doing things without B products
X which business would be severely limited would it be for the lack of add-ons seems reluctant to let B conduct business and advertise their products.
Now, is this a fact that X asked B to refrain from informing B ? Maybe B was too pressant in plugging plugins (pun intended) ?
C allergies would probably be soothed by entertaining a more vivid and profitable discussion between A and B, or B and A. Tea for two, and two for tea 
Furthermore, C would not dare being caught reading the Addons channel. C would not ask B to relinquish his pluggin to serve it as freeware to the avid crowd of leeches.
Seems to me X should cover the Addons channel of blessing ointments for honorable business amongst distinguished publishers and their fans, as an area of good manners and polite conversation protected from C irate clamors. B could make requests to amicable add-ons merchants, and receive friendly advice for the choice of quality spare parts to perfect their programs. Seems unfair to force add-ons aficionados to endure hostile reactions from opinionated C in their legitimate quest for development tools they are ready to purchase with their good money to expedite their coding, unlike C who takes pleasure in never ending hazardous laboratory experiments to look good in forum society. Let business flourish in the Addons channel, and stop prohibition of legitimate spare parts. Enough of forcing add-on developers underground !