Adobe AIR Development

[dtater]

i just got my approval email!  (havent gotten the send us your address email, yet)

AppWorld would like me to fix:

- Please send signed copy

But i made sure to *double* check that i had a signed app with ALL the the folowing files inside the BAR file:

AUTHOR.EC

AUTHOR.SF

MANIFEST.MF

RDK.EC

RDK.SF

those are the 5 files that need to be inside of the META-INF folder, yes?

if i have those files, why am i being told to submit a signed version?

i know there have been similar threads, but the ones that i have seen have arrisen out of people not knowing for sure if they had signed their app... or there was some error with signing.   I had no probelms!

(thanks for the help!)

[jffurlan]

Was it signed with 0.9.4?

[peter9477]

@dtater, there do seem to be other instances of the same thing happening, where people who had definitely signed were told to send a signed copy.

Did you add the "_signed" text to the end of the Name field when you added the release bundle?  We still don't know how important that is to them.

I'd suggest replying to the approval email, adding "ATTN: Jason" (or if someone else was noted in your email, use their name), and pointing out that your .bar was definitely signed and could they please clarify why they said to send a signed copy.

Anyone else who may have sorted this out already, please let us know here what you did...

[longway77]

Hi,

my last App got disapproved after it was approved so I downloaded sdk 0.9.4 and resubmitted the new signed file. Maybe there were some errors in the signing process prior to 0.9.4, I don't know. They finallay approved my App 2 days after that. But There's no link to post it for sale even if it's approved now??

[dtater]

Sorry, i forgot to mention:

1) it was built and signed (via GUI) with the .9.4 version of the flash builder 4 plugin.

2) there were no errors encountered during signing

3) i double checked the bar file (for the 5 files listed in OP) before adding the _signed.bar to the file name

4) just because i wanted to be super certain, i checked again after renaiming the file.

[peter9477]

@dtater, while it really shouldn't matter, the request for adding "_signed" was apparently in relation to the *Name* field in the web form, not to the name of the uploaded .bar file.  It's even possible the name of the uploaded file is not used.... the system may substitute some other name on it.

I doubt this was the cause, but it's conceivable that's why they didn't think it was signed.

[dtater]

---

peter9477 wrote:

I'd suggest replying to the approval email, adding "ATTN: Jason" (or if someone else was noted in your email, use their name), and pointing out that your .bar was definitely signed and could they please clarify why they said to send a signed copy.

Anyone else who may have sorted this out already, please let us know here what you did...

---

thanks for the suggestion!  i didnt even see that part of the email until i re-read it.  the word 'approved' in the subject kina got me all kinds of excited!

i just sent them an email referencing this thread;  i'll be sure to keep everybody updated.

[dtater]

---

peter9477 wrote:

@dtater, while it really shouldn't matter, the request for adding "_signed" was apparently in relation to the *Name* field in the web form, not to the name of the uploaded .bar file.  It's even possible the name of the uploaded file is not used.... the system may substitute some other name on it.

I doubt this was the cause, but it's conceivable that's why they didn't think it was signed.

---

I did.  both the file name AND bundle name had a _signed appended.

The email was confirmin my *initial* application, which i did have a few hicckups with diring the signing process, but i am pretty darn sure that the 1.0.1 (initial version) bar that i submitted was signed.

I should still have that bar file in a backup, so when i get a chance in a few hours, i'll double check that 1.01 was PROPERLY signed.

i know for SURE that version 1.1 is properly signed, but i am still waiting on approval for that guy.

[Concession]

I actually got a similar email today for my Webworks app.

My app was approved and they asked me to sign it, while I know it was already signed.
It sounds pretty similar to what you got.

Mine contains the

AUTHOR.EC

AUTHOR.SF

MANIFEST.MF

RDK.EC

RDK.SF

Files like a signed app too. I know I didnt  name my package   _signed at the end.

I'll probally email the Jason guy in my email.

I'm in the middle of revamping my app, and don't really want to try to repackage it for another week or two.

[dtater]

Yeah, i just double checked during my lunch break; the initial version that i submitted ALSO has the 5 files inside.

i'm going to email the people back and ask what's up.  i'll post here.