[dollars5]

Hi,

I am new to BB development. Am planning to take the $100 signature keys. But before that I would love to get some feedback from my kind fellow developers.

1] How many keys will I get to use?
2] Is that like 1 key per app or unlimited usage (I see unlimited from some posts in here) - pls clarify
3] Can I use these keys on OpenSource apps that I plan to release?

TIA.

[jfisher]

1 - several million - it's a token limit and you're never likely to use them all.

2 - it's done when you build your app - it's nothing you have to keep track of, everytime i release a new build of our app i have to run the code signing utility before sending the code out

3 - yes (afaik - i do!)

you don't have to worry about signing as part of your process or anything like that - it's just a routine step you go through before trying you app on a device, you'll do it without thinking after a while - it's simply a way for rim to be able to track down any malicious apps out there (which is redundant now as you can now buy prepaid credit cards for cash i believe)

[kevin.ross]

jfisher is right on all accounts.

Just a caution, if you are involved in open source (I am heavily), be sure not to give your key or passphrase to anyone.

If malicious apps are built with your signature, guess who's door they will knock on first?

It is worth it to spend the $100 instead of trying to use the standard APIs alone (if you are only targeting the BB). RIM has made several APIs much easier to use, one such being the Persistence api.

[dollars5]

Thanks all for your immediate reply - guess what BB developers are much kind and caring than other devs ;)

Thanks for the word of caution Kevin - can I peek into some of your apps (btw do you own Digg ;) - just kidding)

Regards.

[forcedfx]

Wouldn't it be great if you could create your own key for your own device only?

:(

[kevin.ross]

I would love to start sharing code with the community, such as our log4j port. But there are many issues, and if we shared code directly (as it is packaged), we are bound to conflict with apps that others build. So essentially we will need to copy/refactor package on code to ensure we don't collide (this by my definition is not reuse). The way RIM has the environment today, if we shared source (that would undoubtedly evolve quickly in the open community), we would be risking stability of our apps for our customers, which we can't do.

I've mentioned this in my last blog article, RIM doesn't seem to be ready for open source:

The BlackBerry Developer: Why must the device be restarted after an application update? Does this indicate problems in the future?

On the BlackBerry side, we currently share non-business specific code with our customers for the purposes of the projects we build, but we don't publish the code because we have to ensure our released apps are 100% stable. This model is similar to that of Jira/Confluence (atlassian.com). This allows us to have a significant advantage over other development shops because a good deal of foundation work is already completed the day we start their project.

It is a difficult decision as owner of a small development shop focusing on BlackBerry to release the significant amount of effort we have invested to the community, knowing that it's not possible to really collaborate effectively (see the article mentioned).

In other words, while we could hand out our source, it would not at this time benefit us because we can't share/improve a common codebase. If RIM were to allow us to collaborate effectively, we have 3 projects (sdk, core, widgets) that I would love to open source so we would reap the shared benefits of a community project. We also have a Maven2 plugin that could possibly be opened if it made sense (that is a lifesaver).

So the question is: how do we get RIM to listen to the community and engineer support for open source BlackBerry projects (i.e. isolated classloaders or separate processes)?

Regardless, we will certainly share our experiences to help you along.

[santa kruz]

If i spend the $100 dollars, will I be able to load my java application onto berries that have an IT Policy set up to block 3rd party apps?

[dollars5]

As far as my understanding goes - the code signing for your application is only to allow you app access RIM protected classes - it doesn't guarantee your app to bypass Admin's IT Policy.

I am not 100% sure on this - may be some one experienced can help you in here.

[jfisher]

no. you cannot bypass an it policy. if your users bes is set up to block 3rd party apps you'll have to get the bes admin to allow your app. this makes sense; for corporate users where security is an issue they can prevent users from having any unauthorised software within their network. some bes allow 3rd party apps to be installed but don't allow them net access so you might want to check that too if your app requires network connections.