Re: Button does not receive mouseUP after disabling then enabling button

[Peter TB Brett]

On 2015-08-15 22:53, Martin Koob wrote:

Hi

I found another way to resolve it that works in the sample stack and in 
my
application.  Reading about the wait command in the dictionary I saw 
you can

also use send in time to give LiveCode a chance to process messages.

If I use send in time for both "setState off" and "setState on" then I 
can

click the button when it is re-enabled.

Here is the workaround script for the sample button.

on mouseUp
   send "setState off" to me in 10 milliseconds
   send "setState on" to me in 3 seconds
end mouseUp


You can actually also do:

send "setState off" to me in 0 seconds

The engine will finish mouseUp, process messages, and then immediately 
run "setState off".


Peter

--
Dr Peter Brett 
LiveCode Engine Development Team

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: iCalendar [.ics file] Open Source Lib for LiveCode

[Todd Fabacher]

Thanks  Alex. I am taking off the week to finish the Calendar App and do
the slides for the Create It with LiveCode course. I will include this
functionality and send it back to the community to use.

Much appreciated,

Todd

>It's at tweedly.org/downloads/icsLib_1_0.zip   (contains the library, a
>demo and test stack, some test data, ...)
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Downloaded stacks on iOS

[Mark Waddingham]

Monte's reading of the clause is the same as mine (given the trouble that 
section of the agreement has given us over the years I keep a close eye on it).

Basically Apple do not want apps to be able to download executable code which 
could do anything more than their analysis of the app at submission time can 
do. By 'anything more' what they are really trying to stop I think is 
downloaded code accessing any system APIs which the original app did not. The 
main reason for this I suspect is security.

If apps could download code which could exploit any uncovered flaws or 
vulnerabilities in any of these apis its a vector for malware.

By restricting downloadable code to things that run on JavaScriptCore they know 
that code that is downloaded can do no more than the environment it is 
downloaded into has hooked into. (Of course an app could potentially provide a 
means for dynamically hooking into system APIs from JavaScript - so it does 
make me wonder how effective the restriction actually is, and therefore if 
there is something I'm missing!).

The main problem with JavaScriptCore is that it can't do dynamic compilation to 
native code to speed things up - a user space app on iOS cannot make memory 
pages executable. So code run through this library directly will be slower than 
running in Mobile Safari (no 'nitro' mode).

Since iOS8, however, a WebView (like Mobile Safari) does use Nitro for its 
JavaScript through a process separation model. Which I suspect is why it is now 
more practical for many apps to download and use JS for a good deal of their 
implementation (if they can run in a WebView, at least).

So as far as I can see the current situation is that if you download LiveCode 
stacks that contain code in your app then it violates the terms of the App 
Store agreement. If you download JavaScript and execute it through JSC or a 
WebView you do not (as long as you don't violate the other requirement - that 
the code does not make your app do something outside its submitted intent).

The technical side is pretty unambiguous as far as I can see - the gray area is 
the definition of what an apps purpose is and therefore what downloaded code 
can do without violating another part of the license.

Mark.

Sent from my iPhone

> On 15 Aug 2015, at 04:16, Monte Goulding  wrote:
> 
> It's not vague at all. It's right there in the article and the only way these 
> guys can do what they are doing is because their apps are JavaScript as I 
> said before. Read the clause it explicitly rules out what you are talking 
> about unless it's JavaScript run in WebKit or JavaScriptCore.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
>> On 15 Aug 2015, at 12:43 pm, Richard Gaskin  
>> wrote:
>> 
>> Android has no restriction on this, and the applicability of Apple's 
>> guidelines to this seems, as they say, "vague".  I've not found the specific 
>> text of the app store dev TOS that prohibits that, and unless it were abused 
>> I can't see how it differs much from downloading any binary data.
> 
> ___
> use-livecode mailing list
> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
> preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Button does not receive mouseUP after disabling then enabling button

[Martin Koob]

Peter TB Brett wrote
> You can actually also do:
> 
>  send "setState off" to me in 0 seconds
> 
> The engine will finish mouseUp, process messages, and then immediately 
> run "setState off".


Hi Peter

Thanks.  I have changed to 0 seconds.

How messages are processed sent, held and interfere with one another is one
area I need to better understand. I am not sure for example when and why I
should use lock messages or send in time or wait with messages.  I usually
only try those when something is not working as expected. Is there a good
explanation of this somewhere?

I have posted a bug report

http://quality.runrev.com/show_bug.cgi?id=15730

Thanks for your help.

Martin




--
View this message in context: 
http://runtime-revolution.278305.n4.nabble.com/Button-does-not-receive-mouseUP-after-disabling-then-enabling-button-tp4695119p4695164.html
Sent from the Revolution - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Bug getting group name, plse check

[Richard Gaskin]

William Prothero wrote:
> Richard:
> This is an example of how difficult it can be to find docs on an
> operation that isn’t commonly used and that doesn’t have “obvious”
> syntax.
...
> Perhaps if there was a dictionary based, not on livecode commands,
> but on operations that the user wants to perform, with great search,
> it would be helpful.

We definitely need tagging in the Dictionary, something I'll be pushing 
for as we finally get the ball rolling with the Community Documentation 
Team soon.


With searchable tags anyone can add terms that will help others find 
relevant tokens.


If you were able to add tags to the "owner" Dictionary entry, what would 
those be?  What sorts of terms and concepts come to find when looking 
for ways to refer to objects in the message path?



> Then again, this list is a great source of this kind of info too.

This list is great, and so are the forums, but IMO people rely on them 
sooner in the process than would be ideal.


LiveCode is a very unusual language so it requires much care in how it's 
presented, and more importantly in it's indexed, so searches can be made 
for concepts and not just keywords.


--
 Richard Gaskin
 LiveCode Community Manager
 rich...@livecode.org


___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Bug getting group name, plse check

[Peter Haworth]

Pending updates to the dictionary, I have a plugin available that lets you
add your own notes to dictionary entries and also tag them with keywords of
your choice.  Unfortunately, the details are local to your computer and not
available to other users.

It can be downloaded at http://www.lcsql.com/free-stuff.html, click the
lcDictUserNotes button.

On Sun, Aug 16, 2015 at 9:05 AM Richard Gaskin 
wrote:

> William Prothero wrote:
>  > Richard:
>  > This is an example of how difficult it can be to find docs on an
>  > operation that isn’t commonly used and that doesn’t have “obvious”
>  > syntax.
> ...
>  > Perhaps if there was a dictionary based, not on livecode commands,
>  > but on operations that the user wants to perform, with great search,
>  > it would be helpful.
>
> We definitely need tagging in the Dictionary, something I'll be pushing
> for as we finally get the ball rolling with the Community Documentation
> Team soon.
>
> With searchable tags anyone can add terms that will help others find
> relevant tokens.
>
> If you were able to add tags to the "owner" Dictionary entry, what would
> those be?  What sorts of terms and concepts come to find when looking
> for ways to refer to objects in the message path?
>
>
>  > Then again, this list is a great source of this kind of info too.
>
> This list is great, and so are the forums, but IMO people rely on them
> sooner in the process than would be ideal.
>
> LiveCode is a very unusual language so it requires much care in how it's
> presented, and more importantly in it's indexed, so searches can be made
> for concepts and not just keywords.
>
> --
>   Richard Gaskin
>   LiveCode Community Manager
>   rich...@livecode.org
>
>
> ___
> use-livecode mailing list
> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your
> subscription preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Archaeology

[Richmond]

So; just back from a computer-Free weekend in the villa; so read the 
Revolution 1.1.1. guidebook and coming up with several questions:


1. 'Transcript' . . . not anymore, BUT does the language-qua-language 
have a name that is distinct from the IDE?


2.  12 classes of objects . . . well EPS seems to have gone the way of 
all flesh . . .


3. How come after 15 years with LiveCode I have NEVER heard of 
'try/catch/throw' ? is this because they are pointless,

or am I missing something extremely important?

4. chunk expressions: err . . . ok, SENTENCE was introduced in LC 7.0  
"delimited by UniCode sentence breaks', that is going to need
some explaining, especially as a 'sentence' may be a concept that isn't 
present in all languages 


5.  cross-platform conversion of custom props. well in 1.1.1. it didn't 
happen; does it happen now?


6. "any groups on the current card are automatically placed on the new 
card": well that didn't happen just now when I tried it in 7.1.
but CLONE was introduced at version 1.0, so why was this capability 
dropped?


7. Stack Mover: I cannot see that in the Application Browser for 7.1 . . .

Would be most grateful for any answers to the above, and especially #3.

Richmond.

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: mySQL: PHP or direct access?

[Peter Haworth]

Thanks Peter, I have updated the bug report to ask the question as you
suggested.

With respect, unless revdb is an lc script, it's highly unlikely I would
have the skills to change it.

On Sat, Aug 15, 2015 at 1:29 PM Peter TB Brett 
wrote:

> On 2015-08-15 18:30, Peter Haworth wrote:
> > Excellent, thank you Peter.  Had not had a chance to look at the
> > release
> > notes for those two versions yet.  It doesn't look like the referenced
> > bug
> > report 14289 has been updated to reflect this.
> >
> > Couple of follow up questions.
> >
> > Has the sqlite user authentication module been enabled in this version
> > of
> > the library?  Details are at
> > http://www.sqlite.org/src/doc/trunk/ext/userauth/user-auth.txt.  There
> > are
> > some new sqlite APIs involved with this which I believe would require
> > corresponding new LC database functions.
> >
> > Can you comment on my request to allow LC users to dynamically load an
> > sqlite library of their choice? It seems that capability would relieve
> > the
> > team from having to keep up to date with the SQLite library, except of
> > course in situations where the LC interface to the sqlite library
> > requires
> > a change.
>
> I can't answer any of those questions -- you're best off posting them to
> the relevant bug report(s).
>
> There's no reason you can't simply compile your own copy of the revdb
> extension to your exact requirements, however.  It should be possible
> for a custom version to be a direct, drop-in replacement.  All the
> source code etc. is there.
>
>   Peter
>
> --
> Dr Peter Brett 
>
> ___
> use-livecode mailing list
> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your
> subscription preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
>
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Archaeology

[Mark Waddingham]

> 1. 'Transcript' . . . not anymore, BUT does the language-qua-language have a 
> name that is distinct from the IDE?

Well LiveCode is the umbrella... LiveCode IDE and LiveCode Script being what we 
use when it's not clear from context.

> 2.  12 classes of objects . . . well EPS seems to have gone the way of all 
> flesh . . 

EPS always relied on a display postscript system which was only ever available 
on some higher end Unix systems way back.

> 3. How come after 15 years with LiveCode I have NEVER heard of 
> 'try/catch/throw' ? is this because they are pointless,
> or am I missing something extremely important?

They are used for error handling. It allows you to catch runtime errors and 
then take appropriate action when they occur.

> 4. chunk expressions: err . . . ok, SENTENCE was introduced in LC 7.0  
> "delimited by UniCode sentence breaks', that is going to need
> some explaining, especially as a 'sentence' may be a concept that isn't 
> present in all languages ???

Indeed. Sentences in LiveCode are defined by the standard rules mandated by the 
unicode consortium. They are 'useful' for mechanical operations such as in text 
editors, but are only an approximation to real linguistic analysis (which would 
be too ambiguous for the contexts the intended definition is purposed for).

> 5.  cross-platform conversion of custom props. well in 1.1.1. it didn't 
> happen; does it happen now?

In 7 it's no longer relevant. Text custom properties are stored as text so 
there are no charset issues.

> 6. "any groups on the current card are automatically placed on the new card": 
> well that didn't happen just now when I tried it in 7.1.
>but CLONE was introduced at version 1.0, so why was this capability 
> dropped?

It hasn't been. I believe background behaviour groups still behave like that.

> 7. Stack Mover: I cannot see that in the Application Browser for 7.1 . . .

I'm not sure what that is...

> Would be most grateful for any answers to the above, and especially #3.
> 
> Richmond.
> 
> ___
> use-livecode mailing list
> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
> preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Archaeology

[Richmond]

On 16/08/15 20:50, Mark Waddingham wrote:

Thank you very much; useful answers.

Richmond.

1. 'Transcript' . . . not anymore, BUT does the language-qua-language have a 
name that is distinct from the IDE?

Well LiveCode is the umbrella... LiveCode IDE and LiveCode Script being what we 
use when it's not clear from context.


2.  12 classes of objects . . . well EPS seems to have gone the way of all 
flesh . .

EPS always relied on a display postscript system which was only ever available 
on some higher end Unix systems way back.


3. How come after 15 years with LiveCode I have NEVER heard of 
'try/catch/throw' ? is this because they are pointless,
or am I missing something extremely important?

They are used for error handling. It allows you to catch runtime errors and 
then take appropriate action when they occur.


4. chunk expressions: err . . . ok, SENTENCE was introduced in LC 7.0  
"delimited by UniCode sentence breaks', that is going to need
some explaining, especially as a 'sentence' may be a concept that isn't present 
in all languages ???

Indeed. Sentences in LiveCode are defined by the standard rules mandated by the 
unicode consortium. They are 'useful' for mechanical operations such as in text 
editors, but are only an approximation to real linguistic analysis (which would 
be too ambiguous for the contexts the intended definition is purposed for).


5.  cross-platform conversion of custom props. well in 1.1.1. it didn't happen; 
does it happen now?

In 7 it's no longer relevant. Text custom properties are stored as text so 
there are no charset issues.


6. "any groups on the current card are automatically placed on the new card": 
well that didn't happen just now when I tried it in 7.1.
but CLONE was introduced at version 1.0, so why was this capability dropped?

It hasn't been. I believe background behaviour groups still behave like that.


7. Stack Mover: I cannot see that in the Application Browser for 7.1 . . .

I'm not sure what that is...


Would be most grateful for any answers to the above, and especially #3.

Richmond.

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode



___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Open Source Kickstarter Report Card

[Roger Eller]

In my opinion, it was to give it a chance to grow, by incorporating other
open tech, and also to just KEEP UP with the ever changing tech world
without consuming the inadequate resources of the mother ship.
On Aug 16, 2015 2:46 AM, "Terence Heaford"  wrote:

>
> > On 16 Aug 2015, at 07:42, Kay C Lan  wrote:
> >
> > I thought THE objective of the KickStarter Campaign was to make LC Open
> > Source and Free to the Community. Wasn't that achieved? Everything else
> was
> > just secondary but in support of that goal.
>
>
> Can you give us your opinion as to why LC was made Open Source?
>
>
> Thanks
>
> Terry
>
>
> ___
> use-livecode mailing list
> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your
> subscription preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
>
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Archaeology

[Dr. Hawkins]

On Sunday, August 16, 2015, Mark Waddingham  wrote:

>
>
> > 2.  12 classes of objects . . . well EPS seems to have gone the way of
> all flesh . .
>
> EPS always relied on a display postscript system which was only ever
> available on some higher end Unix systems way back.


But it sure would nice to be able to include eps.  Ultimately, I am likely
to be forced to a platform with serious eps/pdf support

> 3. How come after 15 years with LiveCode I have NEVER heard of
> 'try/catch/throw' ? is this because they are pointless,
> > or am I missing something extremely important?
>
> They are used for error handling. It allows you to catch runtime errors
> and then take appropriate action when they occur.
>
>
They come up every few months on this list

>
> > 6. "any groups on the current card are automatically placed on the new
> card": well that didn't happen just now when I tried it in 7.1.
> >but CLONE was introduced at version 1.0, so why was this capability
> dropped?
>
> It hasn't been. I believe background behaviour groups still behave like
> that.


They do; I am heavily dependent on them




-- 
Dr. Richard E. Hawkins, Esq.
(702) 508-8462
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Open Source Kickstarter Report Card

[J. Landman Gay]

You're right. It was also it increase the user base, which it did 
considerably, so that LC would become better known and accepted 
generally. As you say, the move to open source was also meant to allow 
others to contribute to the engine so that fixes and new features would 
be incorporated more quickly. Unfortunately that hasn't been the case; 
except for a few skilled people (actually I can only think of two 
offhand) the community has not done much there.


I've contributed a tiny little bit to fix an IDE bug but that's about as 
far as my own skills go.



On 8/16/2015 3:07 PM, Roger Eller wrote:

In my opinion, it was to give it a chance to grow, by incorporating other
open tech, and also to just KEEP UP with the ever changing tech world
without consuming the inadequate resources of the mother ship.
On Aug 16, 2015 2:46 AM, "Terence Heaford"  wrote:




On 16 Aug 2015, at 07:42, Kay C Lan  wrote:

I thought THE objective of the KickStarter Campaign was to make LC Open
Source and Free to the Community. Wasn't that achieved? Everything else

was

just secondary but in support of that goal.



Can you give us your opinion as to why LC was made Open Source?


Thanks

Terry


___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your
subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode


___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode




--
Jacqueline Landman Gay | jac...@hyperactivesw.com
HyperActive Software   | http://www.hyperactivesw.com

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Bug getting group name, plse check

[Kay C Lan]

On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 12:04 AM, Richard Gaskin
 wrote:
>
>
> We definitely need tagging in the Dictionary, something I'll be pushing for 
> as we finally get the ball rolling with the Community Documentation Team soon.
>
> With searchable tags anyone can add terms that will help others find relevant 
> tokens.
>
I appreciate this is a bit late to the game, and this Doc Team may
already be heading in a certain direction, but I'm wondering if
there's been an thought of adopting some kind of 'Industry Standard'
docset format? Admittedly I didn't know that such a thing existed
until I picked up an App called Dash as part of a bundle purchase:

https://kapeli.com/dash

I didn't buy the bundle because of this app but when I looked into it
I was very intrigued and from my limited fooling around with it I've
got to say I'm very impressed. What is clear though is that out there
there are a couple of docset standards:

Supports AppleDoc docsets
Supports Doxygen docsets
Supports CocoaDocs docsets
Supports Python / Sphinx docsets
Supports Ruby / Yard docsets
Supports Javadoc docsets
Supports Scaladoc docsets
Supports GoDoc docsets
Supports Any HTML docsets

Previously I've been of the opinion that the LC Dictionary should be a
shining example of what can be done with LC - much like the old HC
Dictionary. Unfortunately, currently it is not that. As I get older &
lazier, I'm more of the opinion that one should avoid reinventing the
wheel whenever possible.

IMO, the Doc Team should either:

1) Go for a 100% LC built Dictionary that is a shining example of it's
feature set = a lot of thought, planning and effort required.

2) Adopt a Docset format that can be used by 3rd Party Apps like Dash
and requires a simple LC Docset Viewer = far less effort.

For case 2 it would simply be a matter of the team investigating those
various docsets and determining which provides the greatest
flexibility, adaptability and feature set - a great time save as
someone else has already done the hard yards developing a schema. A LC
built Dictionary viewer would still need to be made but at least
you've saved a lot of predevelopment time and hopefully avoided all
the pitfalls some of the earlier implementations these other docsets
may have suffered. It would mean that the LC Docset and LC Docset
Viewer would not have to be created concurrently; the Docset could be
created and viewable immediately by 3rd party apps whilst the inbuilt
LC Dictionary Viewer is being worked on. I believe there might also be
a bit of a knock on effect if developers using Python/Ruby/Java
discover they can use the same Document Utility they are using to
access the LC Docset.

Just a thought.

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Archaeology

[Kay C Lan]

On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 1:37 AM, Richmond  wrote:

> 3. How come after 15 years with LiveCode I have NEVER heard of
> 'try/catch/throw' ? is this because they are pointless,
> or am I missing something extremely important?
>
Because you're human and you don't sit down late at night and read a
couple of pages from the  LC Dictionary prior to retiring to bed. You
also don't read every single line of every single post to this List
because if you did, as the good Dr posted, they do come up
specifically or consequentially from included code snippets people
post.

But you're a better man than me because I wouldn't dig up the Rev
1.1.1 docs to see what I've missed; I have enough trouble keeping up
with today's constant updates :-)

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Bug getting group name, plse check

[Monte Goulding]

> On 17 Aug 2015, at 12:46 pm, Kay C Lan  wrote:
> 
> I appreciate this is a bit late to the game, and this Doc Team may
> already be heading in a certain direction, but I'm wondering if
> there's been an thought of adopting some kind of 'Industry Standard'
> docset format?

I don’t know the process they used to arrive at the decision but they appear to 
have invented their own file format .lcdoc. There’s no spec for it in the repo 
unfortunately but there’s obviously lots of examples eg:

https://github.com/runrev/livecode/blob/develop/docs/dictionary/command/add.lcdoc
 


It’s a nice easy format that would be simple for LC community members to 
contribute changes. Indeed you could easily do it all on line via GitHub’s 
document editor. Perhaps that was one of the design goals but as long as we 
don’t need to deal with those old xml files I’m happy.

Cheers

Monte
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Bug getting group name, plse check

[Kay C Lan]

On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 11:04 AM, Monte Goulding
 wrote:
>
> It’s a nice easy format that would be simple for LC community members to 
> contribute changes. Indeed you could easily do it all on line via GitHub’s 
> document editor. Perhaps that was one of the design goals but as long as we 
> don’t need to deal with those old xml files I’m happy.
>
nice easy; simple; community; contribute; easily; GitHub's document
editor; don't need to deal with those old xml files; happy.

Sounds like they're hitting all the right targets :-)

add 1 to happy

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Open Source Kickstarter Report Card

[Roger Eller]

I am surprised that anyone would expect a lot of coding help to rise out of
the LC community.  Sure there are a few who have experience in the lower
level languages, but my sole reason in choosing LC was for the English-like
syntax.  I don't know, nor do I want to learn C or Objective C or anything
else.  I started with HC, and it ends with LC for me.
On Aug 16, 2015 5:34 PM, "J. Landman Gay"  wrote:

> You're right. It was also it increase the user base, which it did
> considerably, so that LC would become better known and accepted generally.
> As you say, the move to open source was also meant to allow others to
> contribute to the engine so that fixes and new features would be
> incorporated more quickly. Unfortunately that hasn't been the case; except
> for a few skilled people (actually I can only think of two offhand) the
> community has not done much there.
>
> I've contributed a tiny little bit to fix an IDE bug but that's about as
> far as my own skills go.
>
>
> On 8/16/2015 3:07 PM, Roger Eller wrote:
>
>> In my opinion, it was to give it a chance to grow, by incorporating other
>> open tech, and also to just KEEP UP with the ever changing tech world
>> without consuming the inadequate resources of the mother ship.
>> On Aug 16, 2015 2:46 AM, "Terence Heaford"  wrote:
>>
>>
>>> On 16 Aug 2015, at 07:42, Kay C Lan  wrote:

 I thought THE objective of the KickStarter Campaign was to make LC Open
 Source and Free to the Community. Wasn't that achieved? Everything else

>>> was
>>>
 just secondary but in support of that goal.

>>>
>>>
>>> Can you give us your opinion as to why LC was made Open Source?
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>>
>>> Terry
>>>
>>>
>>> ___
>>> use-livecode mailing list
>>> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
>>> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your
>>> subscription preferences:
>>> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
>>>
>>> ___
>> use-livecode mailing list
>> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
>> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your
>> subscription preferences:
>> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
>>
>>
>
> --
> Jacqueline Landman Gay | jac...@hyperactivesw.com
> HyperActive Software   | http://www.hyperactivesw.com
>
> ___
> use-livecode mailing list
> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your
> subscription preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
>
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Open Source Kickstarter Report Card

[Kay C Lan]

On Sun, Aug 16, 2015 at 2:46 PM, Terence Heaford  wrote:
>
> Can you give us your opinion as to why LC was made Open Source?
>
The OP was a Score Card on the KickStarter Objectives not a list of
opinions. Now I admit that English is NOT my strong suit as I barely
passed - 49.5% was rounded up to 50%, and so I can't read between the
lines I just read the lines, particularly the headlines so what I get
from this:

http://thenextweb.com/insider/2013/01/29/runrev-launches-kickstarter-campaign-to-create-open-source-version-of-livecode/

Is that the objective of the KickStarter Campaign was to create an
open source version of LiveCode.

If my reading of that is wrong, then OK, it's my failure to grasp the
English language.

As for my opinion;

1) they achieved the primary goal
2) there were stated sub goals to that primary goal that have no yet
been fulfilled
3) everyone who contributed to the KS Campaign has a right to expect
those goals to be fulfilled
4) every direct dealing I've ever had with Runrev/LC over the years
has been positive and by a person/s who seem dedicated to doing the
right thing by the customer
5) I have every belief that the outstanding KS commitments will be met
if at all possible
6) the LC Team is a bunch of humans, not Gods, if it turns out
something is impossible, then it's impossible and they'll let us know
and I can live with that. ( I couldn't do 1% of what they do so it's
all impossible to me)
7) LC is a commercial entity and as such needs constant $$$s to
survive. As such Commercial License holders who are providing constant
$$$s should have priority focus by the Team to keep them happy and
coming back.
8) My $ contribution to LC is minuscule, my contribution to the
Community isn't much better, certainly nothing to the Engine/IDE code,
just some bug reports and hopefully posts here that occasionally help
solve someone's problem. If the OS Community was made up of only
people like me, it would be doomed. If LC as a company was banking on
people like me, it would fail. So I'm thankful for the Monte's,
Richards, Marks, Peters and Jacques in the Community and that LC
maintains a focus on it's real $$$ customers so that it has a fighting
change of achieving another of it's stated goals - 'every one can
create apps'. And I believe in that.

As to my opinion as the why LC was made open source. That's easy, I
have no clue as to what Livecodes annual turnover is. I don't know how
large, diverse or the makeup of their commercial customers. I don't
know what their staff number are, or their costs. I can barely
comprehend how incomprehensible the task of making a multi-platform
Rapid Development Environment is. In my opinion though, Kevin does and
seems to me to be an extremely intelligent, driven, goal centred and
positively looking forward individual. The LC Team should be forever
thankful that it is Kevin's opinion and not mine that drives the
direction the company is headed.

In summary, my opinion as to why LC went open source is because Kevin
believes it was in the best interest to his company, his employees,
his customers, his investors and ultimately to his goal to show
everyone that they can make apps.

1 hr posting : 0 lines of Engine/OSS code added : 0 bug/enhancement
reports to QQC this week.

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Open Source Kickstarter Report Card

[Kay C Lan]

On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 11:30 AM, Roger Eller
 wrote:
> I am surprised that anyone would expect a lot of coding help to rise out of
> the LC community.  Sure there are a few who have experience in the lower
> level languages, but my sole reason in choosing LC was for the English-like
> syntax.  I don't know, nor do I want to learn C or Objective C or anything
> else.  I started with HC, and it ends with LC for me.
> On Aug 16, 2015 5:34 PM, "J. Landman Gay"  wrote:
>
Fully agreed. Which is why I hope the LC Team continue to focus on
their Commercial Customers and provide them with features that keep
them coming back.

I think I've made it obvious I feel the LC Team should be cut some
slack and Commercial Customers deserve a feature set beyond just
locked code.

1 hr posting : 0 lines of Engine/OSS code added : 0 bug/enhancement
reports to QQC this week.

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Open Source Kickstarter Report Card

[J. Landman Gay]

Yes, I think most of us old timers are like that. I think the idea was that new 
users coming from other languages would get involved though. 


On August 16, 2015 10:30:25 PM CDT, Roger Eller  
wrote:
>I am surprised that anyone would expect a lot of coding help to rise
>out of
>the LC community.  Sure there are a few who have experience in the
>lower
>level languages, but my sole reason in choosing LC was for the
>English-like
>syntax.  I don't know, nor do I want to learn C or Objective C or
>anything
>else.  I started with HC, and it ends with LC for me.
>On Aug 16, 2015 5:34 PM, "J. Landman Gay" 
>wrote:
>
>> You're right. It was also it increase the user base, which it did
>> considerably, so that LC would become better known and accepted
>generally.
>> As you say, the move to open source was also meant to allow others to
>> contribute to the engine so that fixes and new features would be
>> incorporated more quickly. Unfortunately that hasn't been the case;
>except
>> for a few skilled people (actually I can only think of two offhand)
>the
>> community has not done much there.
>>
>> I've contributed a tiny little bit to fix an IDE bug but that's about
>as
>> far as my own skills go.
>>
>>
>> On 8/16/2015 3:07 PM, Roger Eller wrote:
>>
>>> In my opinion, it was to give it a chance to grow, by incorporating
>other
>>> open tech, and also to just KEEP UP with the ever changing tech
>world
>>> without consuming the inadequate resources of the mother ship.
>>> On Aug 16, 2015 2:46 AM, "Terence Heaford" 
>wrote:
>>>
>>>
 On 16 Aug 2015, at 07:42, Kay C Lan 
>wrote:
>
> I thought THE objective of the KickStarter Campaign was to make LC
>Open
> Source and Free to the Community. Wasn't that achieved? Everything
>else
>
 was

> just secondary but in support of that goal.
>


 Can you give us your opinion as to why LC was made Open Source?


 Thanks

 Terry


 ___
 use-livecode mailing list
 use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
 Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your
 subscription preferences:
 http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

 ___
>>> use-livecode mailing list
>>> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
>>> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your
>>> subscription preferences:
>>> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
>>>
>>>
>>
>> --
>> Jacqueline Landman Gay | jac...@hyperactivesw.com
>> HyperActive Software   | http://www.hyperactivesw.com
>>
>> ___
>> use-livecode mailing list
>> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
>> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your
>> subscription preferences:
>> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
>>
>___
>use-livecode mailing list
>use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
>Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your
>subscription preferences:
>http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

-- 
Jacqueline Landman Gay | jac...@hyperactivesw.com
HyperActive Software   | http://www.hyperactivesw.com

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

RE: Open Source Kickstarter Report Card

[John Dixon]

> Fully agreed. Which is why I hope the LC Team continue to focus on
> their Commercial Customers and provide them with features that keep
> them coming back.
> 
> I think I've made it obvious I feel the LC Team should be cut some
> slack and Commercial Customers deserve a feature set beyond just
> locked code.

The Kickstarter campaign announced  a community version (open source) that 
would be the same as a commercial version (closed source) , less the ability to 
secure code ?... Why should that change ?
  
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Open Source Kickstarter Report Card

[Peter TB Brett]

On 2015-08-17 04:30, Roger Eller wrote:
I am surprised that anyone would expect a lot of coding help to rise 
out of
the LC community.  Sure there are a few who have experience in the 
lower
level languages, but my sole reason in choosing LC was for the 
English-like
syntax.  I don't know, nor do I want to learn C or Objective C or 
anything

else.  I started with HC, and it ends with LC for me.


One of the most important things that we are achieving with LiveCode 
Builder is to make it possible to write LiveCode itself in LiveCode.


We really want to enable people who know how to program in LiveCode to 
extend and improve the LiveCode engine themselves, to add the features 
they need and fix the bugs that affect them.  LiveCode Builder is a key 
milestone towards that goal.


  Peter

--
Dr Peter Brett 
LiveCode Engine Development Team


___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

"lcdoc" documentation [was: Re: Bug getting group name, plse check]

[Peter TB Brett]

On 2015-08-17 04:04, Monte Goulding wrote:
On 17 Aug 2015, at 12:46 pm, Kay C Lan  
wrote:


I appreciate this is a bit late to the game, and this Doc Team may
already be heading in a certain direction, but I'm wondering if
there's been an thought of adopting some kind of 'Industry Standard'
docset format?


I don’t know the process they used to arrive at the decision but they
appear to have invented their own file format .lcdoc. There’s no spec
for it in the repo unfortunately


The spec is here:

https://github.com/runrev/livecode-ide/blob/develop/Documentation/guides/Extending%20LiveCode.md#documentation-markup

We need to make it easier to find -- I'll see what I can do to make that 
happen.


Peter

--
Dr Peter Brett 
LiveCode Engine Development Team


___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: "lcdoc" documentation [was: Re: Bug getting group name, plse check]

[Monte Goulding]

> The spec is here:
> 
> https://github.com/runrev/livecode-ide/blob/develop/Documentation/guides/Extending%20LiveCode.md#documentation-markup
> 
> We need to make it easier to find -- I'll see what I can do to make that 
> happen.

Oh, thanks

I was looking in https://github.com/runrev/livecode/tree/develop/docs/specs
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

RE: Open Source Kickstarter Report Card

[Peter TB Brett]

On 2015-08-17 06:43, John Dixon wrote:

Fully agreed. Which is why I hope the LC Team continue to focus on
their Commercial Customers and provide them with features that keep
them coming back.

I think I've made it obvious I feel the LC Team should be cut some
slack and Commercial Customers deserve a feature set beyond just
locked code.


The Kickstarter campaign announced  a community version (open source)
that would be the same as a commercial version (closed source) , less
the ability to secure code ?... Why should that change ?


Nothing has changed.

The Kickstarter campaign (which was *well* before I joined the project) 
announced an open source community version of LiveCode that would have 
all the features that were in the commercial version **at the time of 
the Kickstarter campaign**.  As far as I have been able to tell, at no 
point did RunRev rule out adding new, commercial-only features in the 
future.


 Peter

--
Dr Peter Brett 
LiveCode Engine Development Team


___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode