You are absolutely right Alex. Jacqueline had given me the correct handler
and I made the mistake, and Panos corrected me. I have now corrected it but
still same result. See forum post.
https://forums.livecode.com/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=33678&p=188122#p188122
--
Kaveh Bazargan PhD
Director
River Va
H - you're doing that on 'standalonesaved'.
Isn't that too late ? Shouldn't it be on 'savingstandalone' ?
(I've not made a standalone on years, far less ever used either of those
handlers, but based on their names, that seems like a possible idea :-)
Alex.
On 17/02/2020 22:57, Kaveh Baz
>
>
>>
>>
> Sounds great Jacqueline. I will give it a go. :-)
>
Hi Jacqueline
I tried but could not make it work. I have posted a minimal stack on the
forum in case you get time to comment.
https://forums.livecode.com/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=33678&p=188122#p188122
Thanks. I have learnt a lot alread
On Wed, 15 Jan 2020 at 19:27, J. Landman Gay via use-livecode <
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote:
> On 1/15/20 10:56 AM, Kaveh Bazargan via use-livecode wrote:
> > I want to be able to build standalones often, and I cannot distribute the
> > code. So from what I understand I have to convert th
On 1/15/20 10:56 AM, Kaveh Bazargan via use-livecode wrote:
I want to be able to build standalones often, and I cannot distribute the
code. So from what I understand I have to convert these back into standard
stacks every just before making a standalone, then load them thro the
Stacks tab (not Fi
On Wed, 15 Jan 2020 at 16:49, Mark Wieder via use-livecode <
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> I don't think the SB does that on its own, and I'm not sure it's
> something it should do automatically all the time. In the delivered app
> is there (or should there be) a difference
On 1/14/20 8:54 PM, Richard Gaskin via use-livecode wrote:
Mark Wieder wrote:
> On 1/14/20 7:52 AM, Richard Gaskin via use-livecode wrote:
>
>> Is it a bug that script-only stacks can't be imported into the
>> stackfile to become binary substacks?
>>
>
> They can, but it's a one-way opera
On 1/14/20 9:25 PM, Trevor DeVore via use-livecode wrote:
I've only used Github so I can't offer up a comparison. I've been happy
with Github for the most part and my company has been working with it for a
number of years.
Same here. We investigated moving some repos to gitlab some time ago i
On 1/15/20 8:24 AM, Bob Sneidar via use-livecode wrote:
I REALLY need to start using GIT. I am running into that constantly. Are
database schema changes gitable, or would I need to create a separate schema?
Export the schema - it's a text file, so it's a good candidate for
archiving. You won'
I REALLY need to start using GIT. I am running into that constantly. Are
database schema changes gitable, or would I need to create a separate schema?
Bob S
> On Jan 14, 2020, at 20:36 , Mark Wieder via use-livecode
> wrote:
>
> On 1/14/20 9:46 AM, Richard Gaskin via use-livecode wrote:
>
>
On Tue, Jan 14, 2020 at 10:36 PM Mark Wieder via use-livecode <
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote:
> On 1/14/20 9:46 AM, Richard Gaskin via use-livecode wrote:
>
> > Beyond backup across versions (since that's widely available in most
> > cloud storage for even binary files), that Git features
On Tue, Jan 14, 2020 at 4:14 PM Richard Gaskin via use-livecode <
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote:
> Thanks, Trevor. That's a helpful outline.
>
> I haven't had a business case to support so many branches, but I can see
> where it might be useful down the road.
>
> Any opinions on Github vs
Mark Wieder wrote:
> On 1/14/20 7:52 AM, Richard Gaskin via use-livecode wrote:
>
>> Is it a bug that script-only stacks can't be imported into the
>> stackfile to become binary substacks?
>>
>
> They can, but it's a one-way operation. Once you've done that the
> substack and the script-only text
On 1/14/20 2:13 PM, Richard Gaskin via use-livecode wrote:
Any opinions on Github vs Gitlab?
SCaLE is coming up soon. Gitlab always has a table set up.
They're good at answering the hard questions.
--
Mark Wieder
ahsoftw...@gmail.com
___
use-liv
On 1/14/20 9:46 AM, Richard Gaskin via use-livecode wrote:
Beyond backup across versions (since that's widely available in most
cloud storage for even binary files), that Git features do you find most
valuable?
As in Trevor's description, the advantage of being able to create new
branches
On 1/14/20 7:52 AM, Richard Gaskin via use-livecode wrote:
Is it a bug that script-only stacks can't be imported into the stackfile
to become binary substacks?
They can, but it's a one-way operation. Once you've done that the
substack and the script-only text file are two different entities
Thanks, Trevor. That's a helpful outline.
I haven't had a business case to support so many branches, but I can see
where it might be useful down the road.
Any opinions on Github vs Gitlab?
--
Richard Gaskin
Fourth World Systems
Trevor DeVore wrote:
On Tue, Jan 14, 2020 at 11:47 AM Richa
On Tue, Jan 14, 2020 at 2:35 PM Richard Gaskin via use-livecode <
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote:
> Trevor DeVore wrote:
>
> > I use SoS extensively but I had never tried using the SB to encrypt them
> as
> > I use Levure. The Levure packaging library automatically encrypts script
> > only s
On Tue, Jan 14, 2020 at 11:47 AM Richard Gaskin via use-livecode <
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote:
> ...
>
> Help me motivate to move my Git transition forward sooner:
>
> Beyond backup across versions (since that's widely available in most
> cloud storage for even binary files), that Git fe
Trevor DeVore wrote:
On Tue, Jan 14, 2020 at 1:13 PM Richard Gaskin via use-livecode <
use-livecode at lists.runrev.com> wrote:
Exactly. I was hoping the Standalone Builder would do that if you
choose to include external SoS in the standalone.
What I found instead is that it doesn't being th
On Tue, Jan 14, 2020 at 1:13 PM Richard Gaskin via use-livecode <
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote:
> Exactly. I was hoping the Standalone Builder would do that if you
> choose to include external SoS in the standalone.
>
> What I found instead is that it doesn't being them into the standalon
Exactly. I was hoping the Standalone Builder would do that if you
choose to include external SoS in the standalone.
What I found instead is that it doesn't being them into the standalone
stack file as substacks, nor even convert them to binary stack files in
place. It just refuses to allow a
That’s a great idea. :-)
On Tue, 14 Jan 2020 at 18:30, J. Landman Gay via use-livecode <
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote:
> My thought was that you'd use the text files during development and then
> save them as binary with encryption for the final build.
>
> --
> Jacqueline Landman Gay | ja
My thought was that you'd use the text files during development and then
save them as binary with encryption for the final build.
--
Jacqueline Landman Gay | jac...@hyperactivesw.com
HyperActive Software | http://www.hyperactivesw.com
On January 14, 2020 11:38:06 AM Kaveh Bazargan via use-liveco
I use Nextcloud with my work folders, so backup with versions is
automatic, and it keeps everything synced across my Mac, Linux, and Win
boxes along with it.
But my needs are modest. Because I rarely work in teams larger than
three to five developers, and we assign tasks by skill focus so we
The benefits of SoS are so important that I would hate to have to go back
to binary again. Nothing like having pure text files to version, back up
etc. so I am also hoping for an elegant solution to encode these in
standalone.
On Tue, 14 Jan 2020 at 17:31, Richard Gaskin via use-livecode <
use-liv
Sure, and with the extra benefit that you wouldn't have to expose your
code to end-users.
That is, unless there's a way to include SoS in a standalone that
includes encryption, such as an automated method in the Standalone Builder.
I couldn't find one, but it seems like such a pervasive issue
Wouldn't a binary script-only stack be the library stack we already have now?
--
Jacqueline Landman Gay | jac...@hyperactivesw.com
HyperActive Software | http://www.hyperactivesw.com
On January 14, 2020 9:55:01 AM Richard Gaskin via use-livecode
wrote:
Since script-only stacks contain only a
Since script-only stacks contain only a script with no properties, they
have no password property, and thus cannot be encrypted.
I had thought that including them in the Stacks pane of the Standalone
Builder might convert them to binary substacks, where the password could
apply. No dice.
Is
29 matches
Mail list logo
