https://developer.apple.com/library/mac ... 29-CH3-SW3george wrote:From all the info I had I can say it seems so. It could be very good news for us plug-ins developers because we won't be forced to do code migrations.liquidsonics wrote:Is it likely one can use the latest package maker without having to update the whole build environment to XCode 4 if all that is needed is a signed installer?
Unlesss of course you want to sign the plug-in file, which personally I don't see it a requirement. Most are serial protected and I don't think Apple will validate a 3rd party keygen, right?
That's could actually be good news if the host developers decide to ignore plug-in signing. But there's no guarantee they will. Particularly Logic which I'm sure will embrace the planned obsolescence make-them-buy-it-all-again philosophy of the mother corp. As if they don't make enough money already. I don't know how they live with themselves.Apple wrote: Code Requirements
It is up to the system or program that is launching or loading signed code to decide whether to verify the signature and, if it does, to determine how to evaluate the results of that verification. The criteria used to evaluate a code signature are called code requirements. The signer can specify requirements when signing the code; such requirements are referred to as internal requirements. A verifier can read any internal requirements before deciding how to treat signed code. However, it is up to the verifier to decide what requirements to use. For example, Safari could require a plug-in to be signed by Apple in order to be loaded, regardless of whether that plug-in's signature included internal requirements.
Meanwhile, in Windows land, executable code dating back to 1995 still runs just fine on every subsequent version of the OS.




