If you need something more on Android and want to write it we would be
more than happy to support you doing that in LCB.
Kevin
Kevin Miller ~ ke...@livecode.com ~ http://www.livecode.com/
LiveCode: Everyone can create apps
On 05/05/2016, 19:20, "use-livecode on behalf of Todd Fabacher"
wrote
Nice! Works with DropBox URLs too!!!
https://docs.google.com/gview?embedded=true&url=https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/54789013/Elio_Bucks.pdf
On Thu, May 5, 2016 at 2:55 PM, Richard Gaskin
wrote:
> Kevin Miller wrote:
>
> > On Android there is an extra step:
> >
> > If your PDF is at:
> >
I have been using it for my help files for several years now. I use Screensteps
to build my help files and export them as PDF files. I have the PDF files on my
server. When the user clicks the “Help” button, they are downloaded to a
separate livecode browser window. Works well on Mac and Windows
Kevin Miller wrote:
> Almost right. We were aiming for complete parity for the heavier
> weight browser renderer in the widget to provide perfect cross
> platform compatibility and for exactly these sorts of reasons but
> it wasn't possible due to some platform specific issues we found
> integrat
Actually Kevin, sorry but...
users need to be aware about Android. The statement "Bear in mind however
that basic display is already possible with the browser included in all
editions of LC." is not 100% accurate. A PDF does NOT display within the
web browser in Android. We ended up having to use
Almost right. We were aiming for complete parity for the heavier weight
browser renderer in the widget to provide perfect cross platform
compatibility and for exactly these sorts of reasons but it wasn't
possible due to some platform specific issues we found integrating the
framework.
However PDF
Roger Eller wrote:
> On Thu, May 5, 2016 at 11:56 AM, Richard Gaskin wrote:
>> It never would have occurred to me that a browser engine would also
>> include its own embedded PDF renderer, separate from any that might
>> be included in the OS (and IIRC Windows doesn't include one out of
>> the bo
nrev.com
Subject: Re: Community PDF Project (was Revenue and the Open Source edition)
Kevin Miller wrote:
> ...basic display is already possible with the > browser included in all
editions of LC.
That's kind of a big deal. I'm not sure how so many of us missed that, but
b
Android is still in need of an in-stack PDF display feature. The default
behavior is to pass it to a user-installed PDF viewer app.
~Roger
On Thu, May 5, 2016 at 11:56 AM, Richard Gaskin
wrote:
> Kevin Miller wrote:
>
> > On 05/05/2016, 16:10, Richard Gaskin wrote:
> >
> >>Kevin Miller wrote:
Kevin Miller wrote:
> On 05/05/2016, 16:10, Richard Gaskin wrote:
>
>>Kevin Miller wrote:
>>
>> > ...basic display is already possible with the
>> > browser included in all editions of LC.
>>
>> That's kind of a big deal. I'm not sure how so many of us missed
>> that, but basic display on a card
I am, and have been for some time as it happens!
Kind regards,
Kevin
Kevin Miller ~ ke...@livecode.com ~ http://www.livecode.com/
LiveCode: Everyone can create apps
On 05/05/2016, 16:10, "use-livecode on behalf of Richard Gaskin"
wrote:
>Kevin Miller wrote:
>
> > ...basic display is alread
Kevin Miller wrote:
> ...basic display is already possible with the
> browser included in all editions of LC.
That's kind of a big deal. I'm not sure how so many of us missed that,
but basic display on a card is all most people have been asking for.
Super cool.
Anyone here using that? Work
I think its worth a quick chime in here. The total development costs for
XPDF ran into the tens of thousands of dollars. Our acquisition/trade cost
for them was not cheap either. It is unlikely we could recoup that
investment or invest in them further (as we plan to do) selling these as
low cost ad
That will help tremendously!
Thank you, Monty
JB
1
> On May 4, 2016, at 5:19 PM, Monte Goulding wrote:
>
> BTW I have a some Xcode templates that can help make things easier available
> at https://github.com/montegoulding/livecode-external-templates
>
>> On 5 May 2016, at 9:25 AM, JB wrote:
BTW I have a some Xcode templates that can help make things easier available at
https://github.com/montegoulding/livecode-external-templates
> On 5 May 2016, at 9:25 AM, JB wrote:
>
> Thanks Monty.
> I will give it a try.
>
> JB
>
>
>> On May 4, 2016, at 4:09 PM, Monte Goulding wrote:
>>
Thanks Monty.
I will give it a try.
JB
> On May 4, 2016, at 4:09 PM, Monte Goulding wrote:
>
>
>> On 5 May 2016, at 8:39 AM, JB wrote:
>>
>> I am trying to compile a external using xCode 7. Is it possible in anyway to
>> make that external work or a way to use any version of Xcode on El Ca
Thank you, I won’t use XPDF for older
versions. That is good to know.
q
JB
> On May 4, 2016, at 4:04 PM, Paul Dupuis wrote:
>
> On 5/4/2016 6:39 PM, JB wrote:
>> I am trying to compile a external using xCode 7. Is it possible in anyway to
>> make that external work or a way to use any ver
Do you know of a good emulator that will work or is it possible
to make it work by compiling from the commond line tools or
another way?
thank you,
JB
> On May 4, 2016, at 3:21 PM, Monte Goulding wrote:
>
> A patch for what precisely?
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>> On 5 May 2016, at 8:12 AM, J
> On 5 May 2016, at 8:39 AM, JB wrote:
>
> I am trying to compile a external using xCode 7. Is it possible in anyway to
> make that external work or a way to use any version of Xcode on El Capitan
> and make the external work?
Yes
> Do you compile externals on a Mac with new
> OS X systems li
On 5/4/2016 6:39 PM, JB wrote:
> I am trying to compile a external using xCode 7. Is it possible in anyway to
> make that external work or a way to use any version of Xcode on El Capitan
> and make the external work? Do you compile externals on a Mac with new
> OS X systems like El Capitan and if
I am trying to compile a external using xCode 7. Is it possible in anyway to
make that external work or a way to use any version of Xcode on El Capitan
and make the external work? Do you compile externals on a Mac with new
OS X systems like El Capitan and if you do what are you doing to make it
w
A patch for what precisely?
Sent from my iPhone
> On 5 May 2016, at 8:12 AM, JB wrote:
>
> What I am trying to do is compile a external
> for Revolution. Is there a way to compile a
> external for Revolution on Mac that is using
> El Capitan? A patch or anything to make it
> work?
__
What I am trying to do is compile a external
for Revolution. Is there a way to compile a
external for Revolution on Mac that is using
El Capitan? A patch or anything to make it
work?
JB
> On May 4, 2016, at 2:47 PM, Monte Goulding wrote:
>
>
>> On 5 May 2016, at 7:23 AM, JB wrote:
>>
>> An
> On 5 May 2016, at 7:23 AM, JB wrote:
>
> Anyone know how to make xCode 7 externals work
> with Revolution? The latest version of xCode it will
> take is 2.4 and I do not have that on my current Mac.
> Or is there a way to install the older version on a mac
> with El Capitan?
I think you need
Anyone know how to make xCode 7 externals work
with Revolution? The latest version of xCode it will
take is 2.4 and I do not have that on my current Mac.
Or is there a way to install the older version on a mac
with El Capitan?
JB
> On May 4, 2016, at 1:37 PM, Paul Dupuis wrote:
>
> On 5/4/2
That sounds like exactly
what I need.
Thank you!
JB
> On May 4, 2016, at 1:37 PM, Paul Dupuis wrote:
>
> On 5/4/2016 4:12 PM, JB wrote:
>> A number of years ago I installed a external
>> using Trevor’s info but this is good too.
>> proper code to access the embeded binary;
>> I downloaded so
On 5/4/2016 4:12 PM, JB wrote:
> A number of years ago I installed a external
> using Trevor’s info but this is good too.
> proper code to access the embeded binary;
> I downloaded some info from Apple on how
> to install binaries but if I do install them right
> I need to know how to call them. I
A number of years ago I installed a external
using Trevor’s info but this is good too.
proper code to access the embeded binary;
I downloaded some info from Apple on how
to install binaries but if I do install them right
I need to know how to call them. If I figure
how to call a few of the binarie
Thank you.
JB
> On May 4, 2016, at 12:42 PM, Paul Dupuis wrote:
>
> On 5/4/2016 3:38 PM, JB wrote:
>> I just downloaded the mac version of
>> XPDF as binaries. It looks like they
>> would be easier to install than code
>> files but I have never embedded any
>> binaries before and do not know
On 5/4/2016 3:38 PM, JB wrote:
> I just downloaded the mac version of
> XPDF as binaries. It looks like they
> would be easier to install than code
> files but I have never embedded any
> binaries before and do not know the
> correct method to call them. It would
> be nice to make at least a basi
I just downloaded the mac version of
XPDF as binaries. It looks like they
would be easier to install than code
files but I have never embedded any
binaries before and do not know the
correct method to call them. It would
be nice to make at least a basic pdf
reader external and then it can be
impr
unsubscribe and manage your subscription
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
--
View this message in context:
http://runtime-revolution.278305.n4.nabble.com/Revenue-and-the-Open-Source-edition-tp4704079p4704253.html
Sent from the Revolution - User mailing list archi
Robert Mann wrote:
> In a former, not so old, enormous thread dealing with the FOSS
> license and trying to understand what it meant in practice, one
> of the conclusion was that *only Livecode can dual license*.
> Nobody else can do that. And Kevin Miller really pushed hard on
> that point.
Tha
> In a former, not so old, enormous thread dealing with the FOSS license
> and
> trying to understand what it meant in practice, one of the conclusion was
> that *only Livecode can dual license*. Nobody else can do that. And Kevin
> Miller really pushed hard on that point.
Only Livecode can dual l
ge in context:
http://runtime-revolution.278305.n4.nabble.com/Revenue-and-the-Open-Source-edition-tp4704079p4704244.html
Sent from the Revolution - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please
.
--
View this message in context:
http://runtime-revolution.278305.n4.nabble.com/Revenue-and-the-Open-Source-edition-tp4704079p4704244.html
Sent from the Revolution - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode
On 5/4/2016 12:13 PM, RM wrote:
> I would suppose the ideal thing would be both something that allows
> one to render a PDF document,
> and extract all or part of an embedded text layer (if one exists in
> the original PDF).
The XPDF external from LiveCode for OSX and Win is based on Google's
PDFi
What about the code Money has from Adobe?
Can that be put in a external? It would be nice
to start adding externals and something like
that as open source might be the thing to show
people how to write externals.
I know a little Xcode, C and objective-C and
am willing to learn by helping but a pe
I would suppose the ideal thing would be both something that allows one
to render a PDF document,
and extract all or part of an embedded text layer (if one exists in the
original PDF).
Richmond.
On 4.05.2016 17:22, Richard Gaskin wrote:
Tim Bleiler wrote:
> The Livecode PDF viewer is an exam
> On May 4, 2016, at 10:19 AM, Mike Kerner wrote:
>
> Tim,
> I would hope that they would do that, too, because that seems like a good
> compromise, but I am not sure they will be able to do it for Community
> because of the FOSS issues.
Right, the community edition probably can’t be used with
Tim,
I would hope that they would do that, too, because that seems like a good
compromise, but I am not sure they will be able to do it for Community
because of the FOSS issues.
Kevin,
Good to hear on value of the Business edition. On LCB, yes, we all want
more of us to be more involved.
On Wed,
Tim Bleiler wrote:
> The Livecode PDF viewer is an example of something that might do
> well as a separate option.
It might.
It would be helpful if more folks read the specs for the PDF external
LiveCode is including with their Business Edition. It's very
specialized, with extensive features
> On May 4, 2016, at 8:48 AM, Kevin Miller wrote:
>
>> It also bears repeating that I have told Kevin, and others, that I think
>> there is not enough bang for the buck for the Business edition, so we
>> don't
>> buy it.
>
> That will be changing very fast now that 8 is done.
I hope that some
On 04/05/2016, 13:38, "use-livecode on behalf of Mike Kerner"
wrote:
>It also bears repeating that I have told Kevin, and others, that I think
>there is not enough bang for the buck for the Business edition, so we
>don't
>buy it.
That will be changing very fast now that 8 is done.
>LCC is FOSS
Exactly, Kevin, Monte,
The "priority bug fixes" is nothing more than a way for all of us to say
"me, first", and that is totally sensible and reasonable. How important is
that bug that you reported, vs. all the other bugs that are in the DB? Do
you really think that LC is going to hold some bug
We can either prioritize bug fixes for the good of the user base as a
whole, or we can prioritize a bug that affects your project today. The
former we do automatically, the latter has a cost for us and a benefit for
you, thus the service. We¹ve had great feedback from our commercial
customers who h
It's all getting too complicated...
On 4 May 2016 at 10:39, RM wrote:
> To this I would just like to point out that in my "other" email I have been
> offered the chance to PAY Livecode to fix THEIR bugs:
>
> https://livecode.com/services/priority-bug-fixes/
>
> That seems a bit odd.
>
> Richmond
To this I would just like to point out that in my "other" email I have been
offered the chance to PAY Livecode to fix THEIR bugs:
https://livecode.com/services/priority-bug-fixes/
That seems a bit odd.
Richmond.
On 4.05.2016 09:53, Terence Heaford wrote:
It seems to me as a “community” user t
It seems to me as a “community” user that there is no community.
There only appears to be those that want to pay, those that can’t afford to pay
and those that don’t want to pay for ideological reasons.
I, personally do not feel part of a community.
When I read the discussions (not just this th
Monte
> On 4 May 2016, at 13:20, Monte Goulding wrote:
>
>
>> On 4 May 2016, at 3:12 PM, Peter W A Wood wrote:
>>
>> I think that you have missed out one way to contribute that would be very
>> valuable to both the community and LiveCode. That is writing automatically
>> runnable tests.
>
> On 4 May 2016, at 3:12 PM, Peter W A Wood wrote:
>
> I think that you have missed out one way to contribute that would be very
> valuable to both the community and LiveCode. That is writing automatically
> runnable tests.
I did miss that!
> There is an automated test suite but it is kept u
Monte
I think that you have missed out one way to contribute that would be very
valuable to both the community and LiveCode. That is writing automatically
runnable tests. There is an automated test suite but it is kept under lock and
key by LiveCode so that community members cannot contribute b
> On 4 May 2016, at 2:20 PM, JB wrote:
> And so it is obvious everyone cannot be
> involved in programming the open source
> version for many different reasons. That
> leaves people little chance to participate
> by adding code. Use it, point out bugs
> and pay money. That is not what I was
>
nity track, the next step
> could
> > well be to get together some kind of representation of the group to
> > exchange, meet, discuss and relay etc with the objective to establish
> such a
> > community feeling??
> >
> > And that could have a huge potential to mo
ing??
>
> And that could have a huge potential to motivate, generate many actions that
> bring those many benefits, that are hard to see yet with a close view to
> revenues.
> My cents!
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://runtime-revolution.278305.n4.nabble.c
message in context:
http://runtime-revolution.278305.n4.nabble.com/Revenue-and-the-Open-Source-edition-tp4704079p4704180.html
Sent from the Revolution - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
You are correct!
I helped fund the open source and never
made any complaints about it and am not
complaining now.
JB
> On May 3, 2016, at 5:13 AM, Monte Goulding wrote:
>
>
>> On 3 May 2016, at 10:07 PM, JB wrote:
>>
>> We paid for the code and we were given
>> a link to download the code
> On 3 May 2016, at 10:07 PM, JB wrote:
>
> We paid for the code and we were given
> a link to download the code to be used as
> open source code. We did not make any
> agreement to fund its development.
My point was different people may have contributed to the Kickstarter for
different reaso
We paid for the code and we were given
a link to download the code to be used as
open source code. We did not make any
agreement to fund its development.
JB
> On May 2, 2016, at 3:35 PM, Monte Goulding wrote:
>
> Aha... Was the Kickstarter for open source or for the refactor? When you
> con
From a purely selfish point of view (what, me, surely not?) I stated I
wanted to PAY for something
PERMANENT because I develop ONLY for desktop (and possibly HTML%)
deployment.
This is where we might need to discuss the sort of folowing scenario:
1. Permanent version that deploys standalones o
I am stuck between a rock and a hard place.
On one hand i would prefer a pay once use for ever license model.
On the other i want a software tool which is maintained and upgraded
regularly, even if that means that i have to pay for it.
I remember discussions when the old “pay once use that vers
On 3.05.2016 00:50, Monte Goulding wrote:
One thing that nobody seems to have pointed out is the current price is not $999.
As Peter commented (and a number of people seem to have read in a snippy tone
unfortunately) the price rises have been and continue to be well telegraphed with
the oppo
Um: think very closely about "look at Naomi Campbell" :)
Richmond.
On 2.05.2016 23:16, Peter M. Brigham wrote:
Richmond, as soon as I wrote that I just knew it would be a set-up line for you.
-- Peter
Peter M. Brigham
pmb...@gmail.com
On May 2, 2016, at 4:05 PM, RM wrote:
The Scots have b
Hi,
Thanks for the mention Richard.
I have hope that we can land this grant. Then, in turn, that the grant(s)
can be a catalyst for great things to come for new waves of users. Plus,
I'm sure that some really cool teaching experiences still need to be
crafted for the LRNG.org platform.
Time will
Aha... Was the Kickstarter for open source or for the refactor? When you
consider that the vast majority of Kickstarter funding came from discounted
licenses were we finding development or taking advantage of discounts? I
personally made one of the highest contributions of everyone to the Kickst
If I remember correctly we paid around
one million dollars for it.
I agree with Richmond about renting
software. A business needs to worry
Livecode could quit offering them the
rental of the software and then they
are not allowed to develope at all. A
minor bug they could have fixed with
their l
One thing that nobody seems to have pointed out is the current price is not
$999. As Peter commented (and a number of people seem to have read in a snippy
tone unfortunately) the price rises have been and continue to be well
telegraphed with the opportunity to lock in the current price. Regardle
Richmond, as soon as I wrote that I just knew it would be a set-up line for you.
-- Peter
Peter M. Brigham
pmb...@gmail.com
On May 2, 2016, at 4:05 PM, RM wrote:
> The Scots have been running the world for at least 300 years.
>
> Why do you think that about 50% of all Canadians, and a very la
The Scots have been running the world for at least 300 years.
Why do you think that about 50% of all Canadians, and a very large
number of Americans have Scots names?
After all, just look at Naomi Campbell!
Richmond.
On 2.05.2016 22:46, Peter M. Brigham wrote:
On May 2, 2016, at 3:44 PM, Pe
Folks:
Just thinking out loud.
This has probably been thought about, but as the HTML5 export gets refined, I
wonder about the feasibility of creating an actual Livecode programming
environment that runs through a browser. The reason I think of this is that
young folks seem to increasingly use t
On May 2, 2016, at 3:44 PM, Peter TB Brett wrote:
> On 02/05/2016 20:20, Peter M. Brigham wrote:
>>
>> Back in the day, Apple marketed heavily to the teaching/educational
>> market, and the result was a generation of kids who grew up using
>> Macs. IMO, Edinburgh would do well to try to get LC us
On 02/05/2016 20:20, Peter M. Brigham wrote:
Back in the day, Apple marketed heavily to the teaching/educational
market, and the result was a generation of kids who grew up using
Macs. IMO, Edinburgh would do well to try to get LC used by as many
teachers at the middle school and high school lev
I don't know about "clever Richmond", but what I do know about is lots
of clever Primary and Secondary school kids (pace Grade/Middle/High)
who come along, listen to my "wibble", watch me move chess pieces around
the table, move beans around a mancala board, and then sit right down
and dig into
On May 2, 2016, at 10:38 AM, Earthednet-wp wrote:
> Folks,
> Richmond, thanks for your forthright posts and entertaining metaphors!
>
> Re fees, licenses, etc, I am a retired prof who spent a lot of years
> programming for research, then to support student learning in a large
> oceanography cla
I was rather hoping the signal would come from the Mothership.
R.
On 2.05.2016 20:20, Richard Gaskin wrote:
RM wrote:
> All I am making a noise about is the vast difference between GPL and
> Commercial.
I agree that "noise" is a good word there. Perhaps it may be useful
to wait until you fi
RM wrote:
> All I am making a noise about is the vast difference between GPL and
> Commercial.
I agree that "noise" is a good word there. Perhaps it may be useful to
wait until you find some way to turn that into signal.
--
Richard Gaskin
Fourth World Systems
Software Design and Developme
I am well aware that the Free (GPL) version is amazingly valuable - I
use it every day.
All I am making a noise about is the vast difference between GPL and
Commercial.
R.
On 2.05.2016 19:15, Richard Gaskin wrote:
RM wrote:
> ...paying $999 for a year for something whose single difference
RM wrote:
> ...paying $999 for a year for something whose single difference
> fron the FREE version is the ability to protect ones'
> code really does not seem justifiable.
So if they discontinued the Community Edition you'd be satisfied?
Your portrayal of value is exactly backwards: the Indy
I hope not as it is a fantastic thing (despite some slightly off-colour
remarks I may have made in the past), but that is not
my concern. What is my concern is that I feel that very few start-ups,
small-time software people ("one-hit wonders") an hobbyists
who wish to code-protect their source co
Seasoned long-term users of HC, SuperC, MetaC, Revolution, & LiveCode all
appreciate the value of the open-source version. If for nothing else, it
is perfect for noobs to learn and discover its power before buying a
license. People who frequently throw out terms like "you get what you pay
for" ce
On 02/05/2016 14:31, RM wrote:
2. The enormous differential between the FREE version and the Commercial
version: this seems almost an unbridgeable
gap.
Do you think that people underestimate the value that they get from the
Open Source edition of LiveCode because they get it at no cost?
Folks,
Richmond, thanks for your forthright posts and entertaining metaphors!
Re fees, licenses, etc, I am a retired prof who spent a lot of years
programming for research, then to support student learning in a large
oceanography class. My son is an elementary teacher who teaches Lego robotics.
As someone who pays in, I believe that if anything there should be more
things that are added to the indy/business end of the spectrum to get more
folks to pay in, and to get me to pay more. We have paid to have things
added to LC, through externals and other third-party add-ons. Most of
those ar
That's a very well constructed bit of text and I tend to agree with you
re "the best way to get the
resources required for maintaining and improving the Open Source
edition of LiveCode is actually to add Business-only features."
I don't know whether RunRev's "goods and services" section is attra
Hi all,
I recently posted on the forums in reply to being asked why the PDF
external is initially going to be exclusive to Business edition, and I
thought it would be useful to cross-post it here.
http://forums.livecode.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=27160#p141910
I am the main advocate for LiveCo
85 matches
Mail list logo
