I think I'm missing something with regard to the Copy Files pane of the
standalone builder. What's the simplest way to include a custom folder of
images along with a standalone?
I have a folder (named "sections") which contains a bunch of subfolders
and images, that I've included in the standalon
On 7/16/2014, 12:49 PM, Peter Haworth wrote:
Hopefully drawing peoples' attention to how much is left to go will
encourage some more donations.
I really need HTML5 for my current big project. We've been discussing
how to move our giant desktop app to the web and there just isn't any
good way
On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 4:02 AM, Kevin Miller wrote:
> I don¹t want to sound complacent because I¹m really not. However it may be
> worth remarking that our previous Kickstarter campaign was in a similar
> position at this stage. There may be a long way to go. But we can do this.
>
> Kind regards
Mark,
Thanks for your reply. From the economic side of the client/coder
relationship, that's more or less what I had in mind.
Nevertheless, I would once again like to see the strict technical side
of the problem. And perhaps another way to put it is to ask :
what is the life expectancy of an app de
What Mark said is spot on.
Personally I don't like working on something that is out of date / legacy
code and would quote the client on everything that would need to be done.
If the client can't afford the costs of redeveloping and it's possible to
work on the existing application while still bein
On Jul 16, 2014, at 5:41 AM, j...@souslelogo.com wrote:
> ok I get it, thanks for the advice...
> But still my main worry is rather about aging code that could be
> replaced by new LC features that would save time & energy in
> future updates/maintenance...
> I am not going to clutter the list abo
If the changes are to help you to work more efficiently, I would simply
make them aware of that fact just in-case something breaks. I would not
charge for the added work unless it benefits the customer, and they have
asked for it. My 2 cents.
~Roger
On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 8:41 AM, wrote:
>
ok I get it, thanks for the advice...
But still my main worry is rather about aging code that could be
replaced by new LC features that would save time & energy in
future updates/maintenance...
I am not going to clutter the list about it, but I'm really wondering
about that.
Best,
jbv
> I agree
I agree with Richmond. In my experience, it is wise to use the version the
app was originally coded in. Too many times when I've used the latest,
everything looks great until the customer comes across that one thing,
rarely used, that no longer works because you need to code it just slightly
diff
yes, that's exactly what I did (except that did the changes in 6.5.2).
But anyway, in terms of execution speed or app size, and (even worse)
maintenance in the near or distant future, it might be easier for me to
work with the latest LC features than my aging workarounds coding...
Last but not leas
I don¹t want to sound complacent because I¹m really not. However it may be
worth remarking that our previous Kickstarter campaign was in a similar
position at this stage. There may be a long way to go. But we can do this.
Kind regards,
Kevin
Kevin Miller ~ ke...@livecode.com ~ http://www.livecod
Just open the stack in 4.5, do your cosmetic changes and send it back!
Your client has NOT asked for a rewrite or an update; so don't do that.
Richmond.
On 07/16/2014 12:08 PM, j...@souslelogo.com wrote:
Hi list,
Yesterday I was asked by a client to do cosmetic changes
on an app I wrote severa
Hi list,
Yesterday I was asked by a client to do cosmetic changes
on an app I wrote several years ago with LC 4.5 or so, a
time when table fields and datagrids were still in their
infancy or even non-existent, and for which I had to
code workarounds. The client still uses the app on a
daily basis.
Hi Monte
Many thanks. I updated to LiveCode Server 6.6.1 and then Shebang line is no
longer printed. It also seems the the enclosing are no longer
required.
The script successfully runs at the command line.
I still have a bit more investigation to in getting in to run as a CGI.
Cheers
Peter
On 16 July 2014 07:47, Richmond wrote:
> On 15/07/14 23:31, Terence Heaford wrote:
>
>> I did place a :) (smiley) at the end of the sentence though.
>>
>
> Quite.
>
> Let's try this one then:
>
> [not to be taken as anything except a demonstration of the feebleness of
> smileys]
>
> Your nose loo
15 matches
Mail list logo
