Re: Business Application Framework
On 13 Aug 2015, at 9:09 pm, Mark Waddingham m...@livecode.com wrote: That's very true. Indeed, perhaps one could argue that GitHub needs service-hooks which allow customization of merging and diff display. That general feature there would solve the VCS problem in a natural way for a number of types of data which are needed in modern software projects. I suspect it will come in time as, to be fair, the integration abilities have increased a fair bit since we started using it in 2013; and we've used them quite extensively in our Vulcan (CI / Build System) integration so that information about PRs appear directly on the relevant PRs (and shout at you when you've made a mistake!). Hi Mark On this topic I was just poking around on bitbucket today and found bitbucket’s new connect platform. We could use this perhaps combined with LC html or just our own prettified views of a stackdir to do what we need for online code/UI review although I think it would require a server that maintained a clone of any repo that used the addon. https://developer.atlassian.com/static/bitbucket/guides/introduction.html https://developer.atlassian.com/static/bitbucket/guides/introduction.html Hopefully GitHub and other hosts will also roll out a similar feature. I’d be surprised if they didn’t because it looks pretty handy for integrating with all sorts of things. I still think it’s probably easier to handle code review locally but it might be worth considering if the goal is trying to make LiveCode integrate with standard developer tools rather than just getting it to work with DVCS. 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: Business Application Framework
On Sat, Aug 15, 2015 at 3:51 PM, Dr. Hawkins doch...@gmail.com wrote: I didn't include the vcIgnoreProperites , either. Nor explain it, it seems:-) This would cause all of the common suspects to not be included in a revision -- 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: Business Application Framework
On 16 Aug 2015, at 8:51 am, Dr. Hawkins doch...@gmail.com wrote: But how would objects know whether or not to do this in less you set properties in them, anyway, or gave them a script? You give them a script. In my case you handle the lcVCSExport message if you need to do anything. In practice I usually just handle it at card or stack level and reset anything that needs to be reset. ___ 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: Business Application Framework
On Sat, Aug 15, 2015 at 3:56 PM, Monte Goulding mo...@sweattechnologies.com wrote: You give them a script. Yes, but the script still needs a way to distinguish which changes happen from normal use, and which from redesign, doesn't it? Clicking a property seems to be at least as easy as setting a behavior . . . In my case, I might have a display field that got resized as it needed more space, which shouldn't get logged as a vc change, next to a label field for which any change means I tinkered with how things get displayed. Even within a group, this will vary for me. (OK, the *particular* case I'm thinking of is also driven by the need to open cards and use formattedText on the open card, but still . . .) -- 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: Business Application Framework
I'm still trying to grasp the advantage of BAF, since I'm guessing I'm in the target audience. Then, again, maybe not, since I still haven't gotten an email about it from Mildred et al. On Sat, Aug 15, 2015 at 6:56 PM, Monte Goulding mo...@sweattechnologies.com wrote: On 16 Aug 2015, at 8:51 am, Dr. Hawkins doch...@gmail.com wrote: But how would objects know whether or not to do this in less you set properties in them, anyway, or gave them a script? You give them a script. In my case you handle the lcVCSExport message if you need to do anything. In practice I usually just handle it at card or stack level and reset anything that needs to be reset. ___ 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 -- On the first day, God created the heavens and the Earth On the second day, God created the oceans. On the third day, God put the animals on hold for a few hours, and did a little diving. And God said, This is good. ___ 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: Business Application Framework
On Fri, Aug 14, 2015 at 8:12 PM, Roger Eller roger.e.el...@sealedair.com wrote: Not contributing time and code does not necessarily make one a leech! Many of us contributed monetarily to the kickstarter, and I believe that earns us just as many beech points as anybody. Absolutely. Everyone who posts here helping others who have problems with LC are productive members of the community - I'm amazed at the time some people put in and am thankful for every single one of them. 'Constructive' criticism too is an essential element of a community if it isn't going to stagnate, wallow and die in complacency. In this regard I have added the odd bug report or enhancement request to QQC - and note how rapidly the mothership responds. To me I rationalize that it's my way to help contribute to the engine because I certainly don't have the ability to contribute code. Yet how often do we hear complaints that something is broken but the poster has not submitted a bug report? Or how few have responded to the repeated request to check that your OLD bugs still appear in current version of LC and if they don't REMOVE the bug report so the db can be cleaned up and the Team can focus on relevant work. Yes, if you've contributed financially you deserve to get what you've paid for. I pay taxes in two countries. One has socialist leanings and has a dole system. If I were to ever become unemployed in that country I would expect to be 'covered' to the extent that the law provides based on the fact that I'm a tax paying law abiding citizen. I persuaded the CFO to contribute to the KickStarter campaign and as far as I'm concerned I got what was paid for. The KickStarter campaign was to bring LC Open Source; has that not been achieved? Yes, there are some goals that have yet to materialise but I've never seen anything to suggest that VCS or Git support or a Business Framework was one of them. I have not seen any counter argument to my MySQL example; what it's OK for them but not for LC to differentiate between dual license versions? Everyone should be able to have input, IMHO. Absolutely agree, especially when that input is constructive. I didn't intend to mean that people shouldn't post, my comments were pointed towards the selfish attitude of I am entitled to this or that and 'someone else' should pay/work to make it happen. I don't see how people can't appreciate the gift they have been given, it's like those youtube videos of the teenager whose just been give a brand new convertible car for their birthday and they have a tantrum because it's the wrong colour - https://www .youtube.com/watch?v=-JvtlB_NzI8 If you think her complaint is valid then I guess it must be a cultural thing and I'm sorry if I disapprove of such an attitude and that this offends you. Since LC went OSS it costs me A LOT less to own, compared to all the years when it was Runtime Revolution, and it is a significantly better product and just keeps getting better. Thank you Team!!! Again, from my perspective, of all the communities I've ever been a part of, it always the same, there is a microscopically small number of dedicated Richards, Montes, Marks, Peters and Jacques who are in the trenches day in day out and drive the work forward in the most amazing way. Very few complaints from them, just constructive criticisms. There are the masses of sheep who just happily get herded along in whatever direction the community heads. And then there are the complainers, who sit on high, on a horse if you must, or in their ivory tower, unhappy with the colour, or that the work isn't being done fast enough, or their particular pet project isn't being worked on, but they themselves, although the shovels are free, don't ever seem to pick one up and actually step into the trench. In fact I'll stick my head out even further and say that generally these people will stay on their horses and tell everyone in the trenches that the flood waters are rising and they need to work faster filling sand bags, and disaster is looming and the levee is going to break but they will not get down and help fill sand bags. And when the levee breaks they'll stand back and say 'I told you so.' Completely unable to see that they themselves were part of the reason for the failure. * But then again, if you are saying that everyone should be able to complain, then I guess you are agree with me that I have every right to complain about the complainers;-) I think all right-thinking people in this country are sick and tired of being told that ordinary, decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I'm certainly not! And I'm sick and tired of being told that I am. the late great Graham Chapman. 2 hr posting : 0 lines of Engine/OSS code added : 0 bug/enhancement reports to QQC this week. * I have an hypothesis that there is a definable ratio between workers : complainers that can accurately predict whether an OSS project will succeed. If a community was made up
Re: Business Application Framework
On 16 Aug 2015, at 1:16 am, Dr. Hawkins doch...@gmail.com wrote: Along with their customPropertySet, there could be a vcsIgnoresSet, or a group of properties of vcsIgnoresPosition, vcsIgnoresHilite, vcsIgnoresText, vcsIgnoresVis, vcsIgnoresSize. There could be a vcsIgnore checkbook on custom properties This is one of the curly issues. I personally can’t imagine the tedium of having to set a default property for half the properties of every object. My solution is to dispatch a message to each object so that it can sort itself out for saving. Stacks can resize themselves causing resizeStack handlers to trigger etc.. however, this does introduce a workflow issue which I then resolved by doing the VCS export from a command lime app that is run whenever the stackFile is saved. It works relatively well and as it’s asynchronous there’s no waiting around for the save. ___ 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: Business Application Framework
On 16 Aug 2015, at 10:37 am, Dr. Hawkins doch...@gmail.com wrote: Yes, but the script still needs a way to distinguish which changes happen from normal use, and which from redesign, doesn't it? Clicking a property seems to be at least as easy as setting a behavior . . . In my case, I might have a display field that got resized as it needed more space, which shouldn't get logged as a vc change, next to a label field for which any change means I tinkered with how things get displayed. Even within a group, this will vary for me. (OK, the *particular* case I'm thinking of is also driven by the need to open cards and use formattedText on the open card, but still . . .) Yell it’s up to the coder to decide what they want to put in the script to reset properties. In your use case you might resize the stack which would then call your resizeStack handler which handles all your layout correctly anyway. ___ 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: Business Application Framework
On Sat, Aug 15, 2015 at 2:17 PM, Monte Goulding mo...@sweattechnologies.com wrote: This is one of the curly issues. I personally can’t imagine the tedium of having to set a default property for half the properties of every object. It becomes routine; I'm building forms. I have several button that loop through to set things for every field on the card, for example, unless it meets certain qualifications. I didn't include the vcIgnoreProperites , either. My solution is to dispatch a message to each object so that it can sort itself out for saving. Stacks can resize themselves causing resizeStack handlers to trigger etc. But how would objects know whether or not to do this in less you set properties in them, anyway, or gave them a script? . however, this does introduce a workflow issue which I then resolved by doing the VCS export from a command lime app that is run whenever the stackFile is saved. It works relatively well and as it’s asynchronous there’s no waiting around for the save. I like that – it takes a long enough to save, anyway. I have message box commands to bump the version of my projects in library, and also a routine that checks to see if the version is changed on the launch dash but it takes a minute or two to run! -- 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: Business Application Framework
Hi All! I'd second what Graham and Jacqueline shared. My version control system is, Save as... and the corresponding file creation dates. I would be interested in learning more about versions control and tracking, though LiveCode development is not my primary job. (My primary job is K8 education and technology.) A hands on tutorial, where we are using the system collaboratively, on a Hello World project might be a good start. For students today, interested in programming and engineering, exposure to this type of system sounds like a primary skill to me. John Patten SUSD Sent from my iPad On Aug 14, 2015, at 12:05 PM, J. Landman Gay jac...@hyperactivesw.com wrote: On 8/14/2015 1:47 PM, Graham Samuel wrote: To me the ideal is a system which can be explained to a team in an hour and which everyone can then stick to. My (fractured) reading of this conversation gives me the idea that we are approaching Gnome-ville, where really nothing can be explained in an hour. That's kind of where I'm at too. I think I'd really like github, and the things Marty said were enticing, but it's more than I can absorb quickly and apparently requires study. In fact, there's so much to learn that there are entire books explaining it. That's more than I have time to devote to it, especially since I don't usually work in teams, so I stick with what I know which is backups and notes. If someone who knows this stuff puts together something LC-compatible and idiot-friendly, I'll take another look. -- 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: Business Application Framework
On Fri, Aug 14, 2015 at 1:46 PM, Monte Goulding mo...@sweattechnologies.com wrote: As far as lcVCS goes I actually think it would be good better if we could work with Mark and Peter to get the file format into the engine. It really is insane that it isn't built in Along with their customPropertySet, there could be a vcsIgnoresSet, or a group of properties of vcsIgnoresPosition, vcsIgnoresHilite, vcsIgnoresText, vcsIgnoresVis, vcsIgnoresSize. There could be a vcsIgnore checkbook on custom properties -- 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: Business Application Framework
Receiving Social Security benefits is not leaching off of society. You pay in until you retire and then you receive a monthly check base on how much you paid in. Those who spent their life leaching off society and not paying in very much get nothing or very little. The problem in America with Social Security is politicians have robbed it and are complaining theres is nothing left to steal and are having trouble paying those who they owe. They are not complaint about their pensions and will they will get paid not matter how broke America is. If you are paying into a pension your whole life are you going to call yourself a leach when you start collecting it? John Balgenorth On Aug 14, 2015, at 3:04 AM, Kay C Lan lan.kc.macm...@gmail.com wrote: Where I live and work there is no social security, if you don't work, you don't eat. It's survival of the fittest. The thought of people just leeching off society is just abhorrent. It's interesting how such attitudes make a community work, thrive and survive ___ 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: Business Application Framework
On 14 Aug 2015, at 15:13, JB sund...@pacifier.com wrote: If you are paying into a pension your whole life are you going to call yourself a leach when you start collecting it? Is there an analogy here. In the UK people down the years have been paying into a pension be it Private or be it Government and were promised a pension of a certain size at the end of it. For whatever reason as the time approaches they have been told that they have not paid enough in and cannot now expect the same level of pension. :) :) :) All the best 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
Re: Business Application Framework
And in every case of this type of theft you will probably find the global private management company Booz, Allen and Hamilton which was founded in Chicago, Illinois are connected. John Balgenorth On Aug 14, 2015, at 7:37 AM, Terence Heaford t.heaf...@icloud.com wrote: On 14 Aug 2015, at 15:13, JB sund...@pacifier.com wrote: If you are paying into a pension your whole life are you going to call yourself a leach when you start collecting it? Is there an analogy here. In the UK people down the years have been paying into a pension be it Private or be it Government and were promised a pension of a certain size at the end of it. For whatever reason as the time approaches they have been told that they have not paid enough in and cannot now expect the same level of pension. :) :) :) All the best 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: Business Application Framework
Monte Goulding wrote People I have worked on projects with using lcVCS like Trevor and Martin seem to love being about to review their change history etc. Martin didn’t have any version control experience and now works largely on his own but continues to find it helpful. Trevor simply wasn’t interested in working with anyone else unless he had version control. My introduction to version control was through using lcVCS. I have a fairly complex Mac OS X application based on the glxApplicationFramework that has 12 mainstacks including my program stack which itself has 26 substacks. Version control prior to using lcVCS consisted of saving backups in numbered folders. Tracking changes involved writing notes for each version in text files. This was getting unwieldy and time consuming. Using lcVCS has been a game changer. I can go back and see change history and even go back and load older versions of the application from the repository. I use bitbucket to keep track of bugs and features I am planning. There I can write notes there as I work on the issue then when I commit the changes to the repository the note I write as part of the commit is added to the issue. Monte Goulding wrote The project from my perspective has two parts. lcVCS is the engine that manages the file format and is GPL. Then I have an IDE plugin and command line interface that I was intending to sell. The plugin provided some cool git integration into the IDE and the command line interface provided something for git hooks to rebuild your stacks when you merge or checkout and to export them asynchronously after an IDE save of the stack so you don’t interrupt your workflow with stackFile exports. The IDE plugin is the real gem. The automatic export of the stacks after an IDE save means you don't really have to change your workflow. I use SourceTree to view the repository and commit the files to the repository. Once I make changes to the application and save them I can see the changes in source tree as uncommitted changes. This allows me to see all of the changes I am making in one place rather than click through the multiple script editor tabs and try to remember what I did 2 hours ago. On top of this you can see the history of committed changes right in the LiveCode script editor. Hovering over the line numbers you can see the note that was entered with the commit along with the author's name. An added button in the script editor allows you to view the history for that script with the differences between the old script and revised script. I primarily work alone but I do occasionally hire Monte to do some coding for me for specific features. lcVCS allows me to follow as Monte makes changes and see how those integrate into my application and keep my local stacks up to date with his changes. Even if I was working totally alone on this I could not see myself going back to not using a VCS. I think that lcVCS would be beneficial to LiveCode developers in teams or working alone and for developers at a range of levels of expertise. I am still not that versed in VCS and was quite impressed with my self when I made a branch to work on a new feature and merged it back into the main branch. Monte Goulding wrote The market for such a thing is quite small compared to the work that goes in so the deal to sell it to LiveCode where it would become a regular part of the IDE was appealing but it didn’t come off. At this stage if I were to get stuck into it again I’d like to merge both projects and release under GPL but I’d need some financial backing to afford the time... So there seems to be some excitement about lcVCS. We can't expect Monte to work on this out of the goodness of his heart. There has to be funding to pay for his time to develop it and even make a profit on it. l don't understand the reluctance of software developers to pay for software. I have recently started playing Boom Beach for free and I could continue to play for free forever. However I paid $12.00 to purchase some 'diamonds' to progress faster in the game. The reason I did this and do for other games periodically is I know there is are developers spending time to create this software and with the goal of making a living off of it. I am in the same albeit much smaller boat than they. I too am spending my time developing software that I want other people to see as valuable and pay me for it so I can make a living. Now SuperCell with more resources and much larger user base, is in a different league than the Monte's or the Malte's of the LiveCode community or even than the LiveCode team. So it is even more necessary for members of the community to support their work financially. Monte has not charged for lcVCS to this point but I will happily pay him for it when there is an opportunity to do so. His original plan to provide the lcVCS engine as GPL and then charge for the IDE plugin and command line interface. I
Re: Business Application Framework
This conversation (about version control for LS projects worked on by teams, not really about BAF at all at this point) is beginning to go over my head. Long ago I worked in enormous projects (not far off 100 people) without comprehensive version control, and I guess we did something like Brahmanathaswami is describing here… frankly I think one has to be scared of systems which require command-line gnomes to operate them; likewise one has to be scared of team-support systems that don’t have some form of regression-testing and integration framework available as well as pure version control. To me the ideal is a system which can be explained to a team in an hour and which everyone can then stick to. My (fractured) reading of this conversation gives me the idea that we are approaching Gnome-ville, where really nothing can be explained in an hour. I suppose this semi-rant is a plea to keep us less nerdy folk in the loop by explaining all the concepts of LC-working-in-a-version-controlled-context in a non-jargon-filled way. Any takers? Graham PS Just going back to the BAF, where does object-oriented programming come in, and what does it do to the current model in which LC operates? I think that’s another thread: it’s certainly another source of confusion. On 13 Aug 2015, at 04:37, Brahmanathaswami bra...@hindu.org wrote: Richard Gaskin wrote: So lets dive in with lcVCS in v7 today, and with any luck the project will attract enough contributors that they'll be able to handle at least some of whatever work may be needed to port it to v8 later, allowing you to maximize the time you spend on your externals which the community depends on as well. Good positive move to take the energy from this somewhat tense thread to pour into a useful direction. Though I still think it behooves Kevin to consider VCS for the whole community -- it would be HUGE for his goals to make LC one of the world's top languages. I did study the Git book and that level of code control, played with it for a while using some scripts on the web server... I found myself spending more and more time on the cmd line than I would have liked. No doubt one who is using GIT a lot will become very efficient.. It certainly is a powerful tool. But for one level of user it's a bit time consuming and feels like it gets in the way... Meanwhile... I guess what I'm saying is, a full blown GIT management of scripts is scary to me when I would be content with document control... where a stack is a document and in some contexts it can simply be shared with someone else or checked out they work on it and check it back in ... while it is check out I can't touch it. If there were some way to regress and view changes that would be super, but not necessarily required. A simple approach is, Person A gives it Person B and B makes improvements. If nothing is broken... keep on going.. if person B messes up... we delete his version and regress back one and keep going... I made my own magic carpet in-house for InDesign document RCS and our team loves it. We have, in 4 years since we abandoned Adobe's version control, not lost any work or the the ability to regress to a previous version. 12 people working on the same document repositories on the LAN server. It would be simple for me to adapt my model to include HTTP calls to the server. The model is super simple: document is archived and checked in... if it is checked out by someone else, you can't touch it. When someone else checks it back in, another copy is made both on the server and locally. At anytime something breaks (iteraton21.livecode) there's copies of the last revision (iteration20.livecode) in 3 places, on user's A hard drive, the server and on user B hard drive. We can always recover. Its simple but robust pass the baton. RCS I realize that the super coders would find that simply too limiting... but I think it works for a lot of not-so-edge cases. A strong Video screen tutorial on lcVCS might be useful. I want to see if that's where I want to go, or resurrect Magic Carpet... Perhaps there is, within lcVCS a way to keep it that simple. Monte... do you have documentation I can read somewhere? I have a need coming up here soon. I'm in the middle of working on a mobile app, and will shortly reach my limits and then I'll want to pass it off to others to improve, re-factor my code if necessary and fill out the features that are beyond my competency. So I'm scratching my head right now about just how to do that. Methods now are painful: FTP to server... send someone an email. manually change file names etc... Maybe we need to move this to a new thread? Anyone ever hear from Chip in Texas? (author of Magic Carpet) Altuit.com not longer seems to be up. Chipp seems to have moved on to other planets: http://blog.chipp.com/ Cheers from Hawaii. Monte, I hope your farm is not too
Re: Business Application Framework
On 8/14/2015 1:47 PM, Graham Samuel wrote: To me the ideal is a system which can be explained to a team in an hour and which everyone can then stick to. My (fractured) reading of this conversation gives me the idea that we are approaching Gnome-ville, where really nothing can be explained in an hour. That's kind of where I'm at too. I think I'd really like github, and the things Marty said were enticing, but it's more than I can absorb quickly and apparently requires study. In fact, there's so much to learn that there are entire books explaining it. That's more than I have time to devote to it, especially since I don't usually work in teams, so I stick with what I know which is backups and notes. If someone who knows this stuff puts together something LC-compatible and idiot-friendly, I'll take another look. -- 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: Business Application Framework
J. Landman Gay wrote On 8/14/2015 1:47 PM, Graham Samuel wrote: To me the ideal is a system which can be explained to a team in an hour and which everyone can then stick to. My (fractured) reading of this conversation gives me the idea that we are approaching Gnome-ville, where really nothing can be explained in an hour. That's kind of where I'm at too. I think I'd really like github, and the things Marty said were enticing, but it's more than I can absorb quickly and apparently requires study. In fact, there's so much to learn that there are entire books explaining it. That's more than I have time to devote to it, especially since I don't usually work in teams, so I stick with what I know which is backups and notes. If someone who knows this stuff puts together something LC-compatible and idiot-friendly, I'll take another look. -- Jacqueline Landman Gay | jacque@ HyperActive Software | http://www.hyperactivesw.com ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@.runrev Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode I do not understand the intricacies of version control github but I have not needed to with lcVCS. In the daily workflow with the lcVCS IDE plugin the only addition is after I save my stack in LiveCode and want to commit the changes to the repository I go to the SourceTree app https://www.sourcetreeapp.com to review my changes, type a note and then commit the changes to the repository. I can add the term 'resolve' and an issue number for an issue I have entered in bitbucket i.e. resolve issue #130 along with my note and my commit note will be added to the issue thread in bit bucket and the issue will be marked resolved automatically. As I said I am no expert. My big accomplishment was creating a branch and merging the branch back into my main branch. I have only done that once. So I still have more to learn there but without using more advanced features I still find lcVCS and version control very helpful. There is work to be done initially to set up the repository in github and locally and configure bitbucket. I needed support from Monte in doing this part. Once it is set up I don't need to think about that. There were also some changes in my stacks i needed to do to reduce false positives for conflicts by adding lcVCSExport handlers to various cards and stacks. I still get false positives from objects resizing or moving or having a value of a property change. I don't really worry about them too much now. So not having having a great deal of knowledge of version control has not prevented from using lcVCS. Martin -- View this message in context: http://runtime-revolution.278305.n4.nabble.com/Business-Application-Framework-tp4694846p4695053.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: Business Application Framework
Graham Samuel wrote: This conversation (about version control for LS projects worked on by teams, not really about BAF at all at this point) is beginning to go over my head. Long ago I worked in enormous projects (not far off 100 people) without comprehensive version control, and I guess we did something like Brahmanathaswami is describing here… frankly I think one has to be scared of systems which require command-line gnomes to operate them; likewise one has to be scared of team-support systems that don’t have some form of regression-testing and integration framework available as well as pure version control. To me the ideal is a system which can be explained to a team in an hour and which everyone can then stick to. My (fractured) reading of this conversation gives me the idea that we are approaching Gnome- ville, where really nothing can be explained in an hour. I suppose this semi-rant is a plea to keep us less nerdy folk in the loop by explaining all the concepts of LC-working-in-a-version- controlled-context in a non-jargon-filled way. Any takers? Github is very powerful, but was designed by the Linux kernel team and evidences the same level of interest in usability. :) It's not that usability isn't a high priority for many Linux projects (run Ubuntu for a month and see if you're not at least as productive as with OS X), but that level of GUI usability isn't a consideration for a kernel team. I've been looking for a quickly-readable Github For Noobs, but haven't found one yet. With so many things that it does, it may not be possible to describe is succinctly; I don't know, I'll leave that to the others who use it regularly. For lcVCS, I'd like to believe that the community can come together and help flesh out any IDE plugins or other components that can support Monte's good work, so the end result is both powerful and readily usable. PS Just going back to the BAF, where does object-oriented programming come in, and what does it do to the current model in which LC operates? I'm curious about that too. OOP purists love to argue about what constitutes true OOP, and I enjoy popcorn, so it'll be good to learn more about that. -- Richard Gaskin Fourth World Systems Software Design and Development for the Desktop, Mobile, and the Web ambassa...@fourthworld.comhttp://www.FourthWorld.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: Business Application Framework
My favorite quote of the week: The most important thing anyone can do with LiveCode is to simply enjoy it. Without that, nothing else is possible. --Richard Gaskin ___ 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: Business Application Framework
Kay, while I don't disagree with much of the substance of your post, I would suggest we all try to avoid comparisons with things that lead to emotion-laden phrases like leeching off society. Open source is a gift, not an obligation, for both sides, developer and user alike. It's always a good thing when a gift is appreciated enough to engender another gift in return, but I would avoid characterizing any choice of participating in an open source process as an obligation. The most important thing anyone can do with LiveCode is to simply enjoy it. Without that, nothing else is possible. Beyond that, if someone chooses to contribute to an open source project, whether through code, documentation, cash, evangelism, or support, I believe it's best to see that as a gift as well. The GPL guarantees the freedom to make derivative works, but does not oblige us to do so. Moreover, some of the strength of the sentiment here is that many have already contributed to the open source project in advance through the Kickstarter campaign, and that was a specific context in which deliverables were described as being dependent on funding levels that were more than met. That the original estimates were off by more than two-fold is, unfortunately for all of us in this industry, so far below industry averages of estimate-cost variance that it's actually pretty good. Most folks here are patient with the progress thus far; development takes time. But until the Kickstarter goals are met, development time spent on proprietary-only extras will likely remain a sensitive issue, and finding the best balance between meeting those original goals and keeping the joint running to be able do so is a non-trivial challenge. And in the meantime it's worth noting that new features beyond the Kickstarter goals are also finding their way into both Commercial and Community editions, such as being able to seek into large files beyond the old addressing limit, Android intents, Unicode that goes beyond mere compatibility with the past to introduce new chunk types invaluable for language processing like trueWord and sentence, and more. As with other dual-licensed projects, there's a delicate balance being explored here. While the truly perfect recipe for success has not yet been discovered in this unique project, at a minimum we can move this exploration forward most productively by avoiding emotion-laden terms. -- 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: Business Application Framework
On 15 Aug 2015, at 1:09 am, Martin Koob mk...@rogers.com wrote: Monte has not charged for lcVCS to this point but I will happily pay him for it when there is an opportunity to do so. His original plan to provide the lcVCS engine as GPL and then charge for the IDE plugin and command line interface. I would be happy to pay for the plugin given the value it adds and time it saves. Would people who want version control for LiveCode be willing to commit up front and pay for the lcVCS plugin or some other payment option or commit in a funding campaign? If there are not enough people willing to commit the funds this all becomes a moot discussion. Thanks Martin As far as lcVCS goes I actually think it would be good better if we could work with Mark and Peter to get the file format into the engine. That way if there’s a new property or something it’s all automatic. I think what I’ve done is useful in that both it has worked and that it has given me a fairly solid understanding of what the issues are to pass on where I can or at least discuss with the engine guys. There’s a healthy discussion in that direction going on here https://github.com/runrev/livecode/pull/1590#issuecomment-131057336 https://github.com/runrev/livecode/pull/1590#issuecomment-131057336 The git IDE integration on the other hand could be a plugin (paid or open source) or part of the IDE that comes out of the box. It’s where the magic happens. Stuff like the toolTip on the script line numbers showing the author and commit message. So I’d rather focus on that stuff. 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: Business Application Framework
In terms of the remaining work, would it be helpful if you had one or two other people to lend a hand with that? I didn’t really answer this question sorry. Probably the most helpful would be more documentation. Perhaps videos explaining things? I have some docs for lcVCS here https://github.com/montegoulding/lcvcs/wiki https://github.com/montegoulding/lcvcs/wiki and anyone can clone the wiki repo and add/edit pages if they want to contribute docs. However, there is a reasonable question mark about whether to push ahead with tools that are built on top of lcVCS or to wait and see if there is a stackdir format coming to the engine and then build some tools based on that. ___ 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: Business Application Framework
On 15 Aug 2015, at 7:23 am, Malte Brill revolut...@derbrill.de wrote: how much would you think we need to raise to make your work on this worthwhile? I’d surely be willing to put in a couple of €s if we had something that installs easiely and is easy to use. (Of course best coming out of the box) I would like to have Version Control rather yesterday than tomorrow, but was a little bit scared of lcVCS up until now, mainly due to time constraints not being able to test out things... It’s a bit of a “how long is a piece of string” question at the moment. I can’t promise to make anything work out of the box in the IDE. If that’s what the community wants (I want it too) then it’s probably better that whatever funding is raised goes to Edinburgh so it’s part of the IDE/engine. On the other hand they may not want to complicate the IDE with it for all users??? If it needs to remain a plugin then perhaps with some community support I could release my CLI and IDE plugin but it’s probably best to work through things with the team in Edinburgh first. ___ 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: Business Application Framework
On 15 Aug 2015, at 8:46 am, Monte Goulding mo...@sweattechnologies.com wrote: In terms of the remaining work, would it be helpful if you had one or two other people to lend a hand with that? I didn’t really answer this question sorry. Probably the most helpful would be more documentation. Perhaps videos explaining things? I have some docs for lcVCS here https://github.com/montegoulding/lcvcs/wiki https://github.com/montegoulding/lcvcs/wiki and anyone can clone the wiki repo and add/edit pages if they want to contribute docs. BTW Incase folks don’t know what I’m talking about with IDE integration here’s some screenshots: https://www.dropbox.com/s/ji82f74vof30x8d/Screenshot%202015-08-15%2009.07.20.png?dl=0 https://www.dropbox.com/s/ji82f74vof30x8d/Screenshot%202015-08-15%2009.07.20.png?dl=0 https://www.dropbox.com/s/sh2ac48je6jaww0/Screenshot%202015-08-15%2009.12.03.png?dl=0 https://www.dropbox.com/s/sh2ac48je6jaww0/Screenshot%202015-08-15%2009.12.03.png?dl=0 There’s more but those are my favourites ;-) 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: Business Application Framework
The git IDE integration on the other hand could be a plugin (paid or open source) or part of the IDE that comes out of the box. It’s where the magic happens. Stuff like the toolTip on the script line numbers showing the author and commit message. So I’d rather focus on that stuff. Monte, how much would you think we need to raise to make your work on this worthwhile? I’d surely be willing to put in a couple of €s if we had something that installs easiely and is easy to use. (Of course best coming out of the box) I would like to have Version Control rather yesterday than tomorrow, but was a little bit scared of lcVCS up until now, mainly due to time constraints not being able to test out things... Cheers, Malte -- derbrill IT-service Malte Pfaff-Brill Alsenstr. 15, d-24768 Rendsburg Tel: +49 4331-337 640 0 eMail: i...@derbrill.de web: http://www.derbrill.de Steuernummer: 28 015 03865 VAT ID: DE223571286 Bankverbindung: BIC: GENODEF1KIL IBAN: DE87 2109 0007 0088 2849 05 Kieler Volksbank e.G. Kontoinhaber Malte Pfaff-Brill ___ 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: Business Application Framework
Monte Goulding wrote: It’s a bit of a “how long is a piece of string” question at the moment. I can’t promise to make anything work out of the box in the IDE. If that’s what the community wants (I want it too) then it’s probably better that whatever funding is raised goes to Edinburgh so it’s part of the IDE/engine. On the other hand they may not want to complicate the IDE with it for all users??? If it needs to remain a plugin then perhaps with some community support I could release my CLI and IDE plugin but it’s probably best to work through things with the team in Edinburgh first. Why not a bundled plugin? There's good precedent with LC shipping with third-party plugins bundled, and that makes it instantly available to the widest audience while still managing expectations in terms of support. In terms of the remaining work, would it be helpful if you had one or two other people to lend a hand with that? -- 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: Business Application Framework
On 15 Aug 2015, at 8:11 am, Richard Gaskin ambassa...@fourthworld.com wrote: Why not a bundled plugin? There's good precedent with LC shipping with third-party plugins bundled, and that makes it instantly available to the widest audience while still managing expectations in terms of support. That would be possible too, all options are open. In terms of the remaining work, would it be helpful if you had one or two other people to lend a hand with that? In terms of lcVCS itself there is no remaining work I’m aware of until we get to LC 8 support. For LC 8 I need to know which widgets are loaded and the properties of widgets so I can save them. The properties property on a widget is empty and that’s what lcVCS uses for legacy objects. It’s possible to hack the IDE to get this info but I’m reluctant to do that. In terms of the CLI and git ide integration plugin that could do with some more work (a lot more if we decide a full pull review workflow should be integrated into it but I guess we don’t need to do that just yet). From memory there were some issues Trevor had with so he decided not to use it… I can’t remember if I resolved all of those. ___ 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: Business Application Framework
Kay, Good points, after ignoring the rhetoric. There could be argument about which features are included in all versions. Seems like zip and PDF support would be part of any modern authoring system. I contributed a substantial (for me) amount to the Kickstarter, appreciate the need for the mothership to be solvent financially, and care about the future of livecode, now that I have invested heavily in it. That seems to be the thrust of most of the folks posting comments on this issue. Best, Bill William Prothero http://es.earthednet.org On Aug 14, 2015, at 3:04 AM, Kay C Lan lan.kc.macm...@gmail.com wrote: illustrates to me that the community is very concerned about the possibility of a two-tiered livecode environment where we need to pay extra to get added premium features that we all will want. I wasn't going to post but this is such and oxymoron, and so prevalent here I just can't constrain myself. I'm not a big Dual Licence user but of those companies I deal with that do such a thing, it seems this is EXACTLY what happens, open source users DON'T get what the premium users are paying for. Lets take just one small example: MySQL, where an Enterprise license only costs US5000 as year. Lets see what features they get that the Community Users don't get: MySQL Fabric MySQL Partitioning MySQL Utilities Storage Engine: NDB MySQL Enterprise Dashboard MySQL Enterprise Advisor MySQL Query Analyzer MySQL Replication Monitor Hot Backup for InnoDB Full, Incremental, Partial, Optimistic Backup Full, Partial, Selective, Hot Selective Restore Encryption and Compression Point-in-Time-Recovery MySQL Enterprise Authentication MySQL Enterprise Encryption MySQL Enterprise Firewall MySQL Enterprise Audit Thread pool HA using Oracle VM Template HA using Oracle Linux and DRBD HA using Oracle Clusterware HA using Solaris Clustering HA using Windows Clustering Configuration and Provisioning Automatic Scaling Management and Monitoring ... and the list goes on and on. For the World's most popular open source database there seems to be a MASSIVE difference between the features the Community gets compared to those who purchase and Enterprise license. From my perspective LiveCode Ltd seem to be dragging their feet a bit and if I'd purchased an Enterprise License I might wish to complain that I'm not getting enough 'extras'. I, personally think I've got excellent value for money from LiveCode Ltd. I got what I wanted from the KickStarter campaign plus more. But maybe I just have a far more realistic view on life, the universe, and software development. Where I live and work there is no social security, if you don't work, you don't eat. It's survival of the fittest. The thought of people just leeching off society is just abhorrent. It's interesting how such attitudes make a community work, thrive and survive. So please, when you post negative comments about all that is wrong with the LiveCode Community, please include an estimate of the number of hours a week you spend posting to this list, and the number of hours you spend adding to Community Edition - either directly to the Engine/IDE or some Community Software like lcVCS or GLX2. Because from my perspective the only worrying concern with regard to LiveCode Community is the number of leeches compared to the numbers actually contributing. 1 hr posting / 0 hrs improving LC Community - I'm a leech. I find it interesting that the few open source communities I deal with, all of them suffer the same situation, those that expend the most ($, time and effort) in the Community seem to complain the least (as seen by the few previous posts focusing on what can be done to get lcVCS really working) and those that expend the least complain the most. ___ 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: Business Application Framework
Not contributing time and code does not necessarily make one a leech! Many of us contributed monetarily to the kickstarter, and I believe that earns us just as many beech points as anybody. Climb down off that high horse. We can hardly see you way up there. Everyone should be able to have input, IMHO. On Aug 14, 2015 6:04 AM, Kay C Lan lan.kc.macm...@gmail.com wrote: illustrates to me that the community is very concerned about the possibility of a two-tiered livecode environment where we need to pay extra to get added premium features that we all will want. I wasn't going to post but this is such and oxymoron, and so prevalent here I just can't constrain myself. I'm not a big Dual Licence user but of those companies I deal with that do such a thing, it seems this is EXACTLY what happens, open source users DON'T get what the premium users are paying for. Lets take just one small example: MySQL, where an Enterprise license only costs US5000 as year. Lets see what features they get that the Community Users don't get: MySQL Fabric MySQL Partitioning MySQL Utilities Storage Engine: NDB MySQL Enterprise Dashboard MySQL Enterprise Advisor MySQL Query Analyzer MySQL Replication Monitor Hot Backup for InnoDB Full, Incremental, Partial, Optimistic Backup Full, Partial, Selective, Hot Selective Restore Encryption and Compression Point-in-Time-Recovery MySQL Enterprise Authentication MySQL Enterprise Encryption MySQL Enterprise Firewall MySQL Enterprise Audit Thread pool HA using Oracle VM Template HA using Oracle Linux and DRBD HA using Oracle Clusterware HA using Solaris Clustering HA using Windows Clustering Configuration and Provisioning Automatic Scaling Management and Monitoring ... and the list goes on and on. For the World's most popular open source database there seems to be a MASSIVE difference between the features the Community gets compared to those who purchase and Enterprise license. From my perspective LiveCode Ltd seem to be dragging their feet a bit and if I'd purchased an Enterprise License I might wish to complain that I'm not getting enough 'extras'. I, personally think I've got excellent value for money from LiveCode Ltd. I got what I wanted from the KickStarter campaign plus more. But maybe I just have a far more realistic view on life, the universe, and software development. Where I live and work there is no social security, if you don't work, you don't eat. It's survival of the fittest. The thought of people just leeching off society is just abhorrent. It's interesting how such attitudes make a community work, thrive and survive. So please, when you post negative comments about all that is wrong with the LiveCode Community, please include an estimate of the number of hours a week you spend posting to this list, and the number of hours you spend adding to Community Edition - either directly to the Engine/IDE or some Community Software like lcVCS or GLX2. Because from my perspective the only worrying concern with regard to LiveCode Community is the number of leeches compared to the numbers actually contributing. 1 hr posting / 0 hrs improving LC Community - I'm a leech. I find it interesting that the few open source communities I deal with, all of them suffer the same situation, those that expend the most ($, time and effort) in the Community seem to complain the least (as seen by the few previous posts focusing on what can be done to get lcVCS really working) and those that expend the least complain the most. ___ 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: Business Application Framework
Well said! Graham (Indy licence holder and Kickstarter contributor). On 14 Aug 2015, at 14:12, Roger Eller roger.e.el...@sealedair.com wrote: Not contributing time and code does not necessarily make one a leech! Many of us contributed monetarily to the kickstarter, and I believe that earns us just as many beech points as anybody. Climb down off that high horse. We can hardly see you way up there. Everyone should be able to have input, IMHO. On Aug 14, 2015 6:04 AM, Kay C Lan lan.kc.macm...@gmail.com wrote: illustrates to me that the community is very concerned about the possibility of a two-tiered livecode environment where we need to pay extra to get added premium features that we all will want. I wasn't going to post but this is such and oxymoron, and so prevalent here I just can't constrain myself. I'm not a big Dual Licence user but of those companies I deal with that do such a thing, it seems this is EXACTLY what happens, open source users DON'T get what the premium users are paying for. Lets take just one small example: MySQL, where an Enterprise license only costs US5000 as year. Lets see what features they get that the Community Users don't get: MySQL Fabric MySQL Partitioning MySQL Utilities Storage Engine: NDB MySQL Enterprise Dashboard MySQL Enterprise Advisor MySQL Query Analyzer MySQL Replication Monitor Hot Backup for InnoDB Full, Incremental, Partial, Optimistic Backup Full, Partial, Selective, Hot Selective Restore Encryption and Compression Point-in-Time-Recovery MySQL Enterprise Authentication MySQL Enterprise Encryption MySQL Enterprise Firewall MySQL Enterprise Audit Thread pool HA using Oracle VM Template HA using Oracle Linux and DRBD HA using Oracle Clusterware HA using Solaris Clustering HA using Windows Clustering Configuration and Provisioning Automatic Scaling Management and Monitoring ... and the list goes on and on. For the World's most popular open source database there seems to be a MASSIVE difference between the features the Community gets compared to those who purchase and Enterprise license. From my perspective LiveCode Ltd seem to be dragging their feet a bit and if I'd purchased an Enterprise License I might wish to complain that I'm not getting enough 'extras'. I, personally think I've got excellent value for money from LiveCode Ltd. I got what I wanted from the KickStarter campaign plus more. But maybe I just have a far more realistic view on life, the universe, and software development. Where I live and work there is no social security, if you don't work, you don't eat. It's survival of the fittest. The thought of people just leeching off society is just abhorrent. It's interesting how such attitudes make a community work, thrive and survive. So please, when you post negative comments about all that is wrong with the LiveCode Community, please include an estimate of the number of hours a week you spend posting to this list, and the number of hours you spend adding to Community Edition - either directly to the Engine/IDE or some Community Software like lcVCS or GLX2. Because from my perspective the only worrying concern with regard to LiveCode Community is the number of leeches compared to the numbers actually contributing. 1 hr posting / 0 hrs improving LC Community - I'm a leech. I find it interesting that the few open source communities I deal with, all of them suffer the same situation, those that expend the most ($, time and effort) in the Community seem to complain the least (as seen by the few previous posts focusing on what can be done to get lcVCS really working) and those that expend the least complain the most. ___ 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: Business Application Framework
illustrates to me that the community is very concerned about the possibility of a two-tiered livecode environment where we need to pay extra to get added premium features that we all will want. I wasn't going to post but this is such and oxymoron, and so prevalent here I just can't constrain myself. I'm not a big Dual Licence user but of those companies I deal with that do such a thing, it seems this is EXACTLY what happens, open source users DON'T get what the premium users are paying for. Lets take just one small example: MySQL, where an Enterprise license only costs US5000 as year. Lets see what features they get that the Community Users don't get: MySQL Fabric MySQL Partitioning MySQL Utilities Storage Engine: NDB MySQL Enterprise Dashboard MySQL Enterprise Advisor MySQL Query Analyzer MySQL Replication Monitor Hot Backup for InnoDB Full, Incremental, Partial, Optimistic Backup Full, Partial, Selective, Hot Selective Restore Encryption and Compression Point-in-Time-Recovery MySQL Enterprise Authentication MySQL Enterprise Encryption MySQL Enterprise Firewall MySQL Enterprise Audit Thread pool HA using Oracle VM Template HA using Oracle Linux and DRBD HA using Oracle Clusterware HA using Solaris Clustering HA using Windows Clustering Configuration and Provisioning Automatic Scaling Management and Monitoring ... and the list goes on and on. For the World's most popular open source database there seems to be a MASSIVE difference between the features the Community gets compared to those who purchase and Enterprise license. From my perspective LiveCode Ltd seem to be dragging their feet a bit and if I'd purchased an Enterprise License I might wish to complain that I'm not getting enough 'extras'. I, personally think I've got excellent value for money from LiveCode Ltd. I got what I wanted from the KickStarter campaign plus more. But maybe I just have a far more realistic view on life, the universe, and software development. Where I live and work there is no social security, if you don't work, you don't eat. It's survival of the fittest. The thought of people just leeching off society is just abhorrent. It's interesting how such attitudes make a community work, thrive and survive. So please, when you post negative comments about all that is wrong with the LiveCode Community, please include an estimate of the number of hours a week you spend posting to this list, and the number of hours you spend adding to Community Edition - either directly to the Engine/IDE or some Community Software like lcVCS or GLX2. Because from my perspective the only worrying concern with regard to LiveCode Community is the number of leeches compared to the numbers actually contributing. 1 hr posting / 0 hrs improving LC Community - I'm a leech. I find it interesting that the few open source communities I deal with, all of them suffer the same situation, those that expend the most ($, time and effort) in the Community seem to complain the least (as seen by the few previous posts focusing on what can be done to get lcVCS really working) and those that expend the least complain the most. ___ 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: Business Application Framework
As you read this, keep in mind I have no direct knowledge of the financial standing of RunRev, so its all supposition. (Plus, i'm not a big brain like most on the list, so ignore me if you wish) Lets get this out of the way first: Contributions here, and in the forums, as well as monetary contributions during kickstarter while NOT being an engine contributor leaching. Even just quietly using lc (community or otherwise) without posting here is a contribution. Everyone I know, who has even a passing interest in programming knows about livecode now. Some are rather sick of hearing about it. While I too fear a growing feature disparity between community and commercial, there is truth when its stated.. it's open source. if you want it, add it. Next: Alas, appearance matters. I can understand why people are freaking out. Runrev has a pool of available man hours that can be used. A finite resource. And it appears that man hours that could have been used to further the goals of the kickstarter have been used in an effort to differentiate the 2 versions instead. In this case, one should take a deeper look. Nobody doubts that expenses and time have gone WAY beyond what was expected. I would guess that the phrase bleeding money is a fairly accurate description of the situation. While its not exactly the same business model, in manufacturing I've seen companies that are making a product that costs more to make than they're getting in return, and these same companies INCREASE production on these very items that are bleeding them dry. A loss leader can be great for marketing, but you MUST be able to make enough profit from other areas to cover the costs. This is what is happening here. Kevin and Runrev are looking for ways to offset the tremendous cost of much needed retooling, and introducing new product features to hopefully increase their income flow to offset the huge outgo. Could they have shoved every possible resource towards the kickstarter goals, ignoring all other needs? Yep. Would it have been a mistake? Almost surely. On Fri, Aug 14, 2015 at 6:24 AM, Graham Samuel livf...@mac.com wrote: Well said! Graham (Indy licence holder and Kickstarter contributor). On 14 Aug 2015, at 14:12, Roger Eller roger.e.el...@sealedair.com wrote: Not contributing time and code does not necessarily make one a leech! Many of us contributed monetarily to the kickstarter, and I believe that earns us just as many beech points as anybody. Climb down off that high horse. We can hardly see you way up there. Everyone should be able to have input, IMHO. On Aug 14, 2015 6:04 AM, Kay C Lan lan.kc.macm...@gmail.com wrote: illustrates to me that the community is very concerned about the possibility of a two-tiered livecode environment where we need to pay extra to get added premium features that we all will want. I wasn't going to post but this is such and oxymoron, and so prevalent here I just can't constrain myself. I'm not a big Dual Licence user but of those companies I deal with that do such a thing, it seems this is EXACTLY what happens, open source users DON'T get what the premium users are paying for. Lets take just one small example: MySQL, where an Enterprise license only costs US5000 as year. Lets see what features they get that the Community Users don't get: MySQL Fabric MySQL Partitioning MySQL Utilities Storage Engine: NDB MySQL Enterprise Dashboard MySQL Enterprise Advisor MySQL Query Analyzer MySQL Replication Monitor Hot Backup for InnoDB Full, Incremental, Partial, Optimistic Backup Full, Partial, Selective, Hot Selective Restore Encryption and Compression Point-in-Time-Recovery MySQL Enterprise Authentication MySQL Enterprise Encryption MySQL Enterprise Firewall MySQL Enterprise Audit Thread pool HA using Oracle VM Template HA using Oracle Linux and DRBD HA using Oracle Clusterware HA using Solaris Clustering HA using Windows Clustering Configuration and Provisioning Automatic Scaling Management and Monitoring ... and the list goes on and on. For the World's most popular open source database there seems to be a MASSIVE difference between the features the Community gets compared to those who purchase and Enterprise license. From my perspective LiveCode Ltd seem to be dragging their feet a bit and if I'd purchased an Enterprise License I might wish to complain that I'm not getting enough 'extras'. I, personally think I've got excellent value for money from LiveCode Ltd. I got what I wanted from the KickStarter campaign plus more. But maybe I just have a far more realistic view on life, the universe, and software development. Where I live and work there is no social security, if you don't work, you don't eat. It's survival of the fittest. The thought of people just leeching off society is just abhorrent. It's interesting how such attitudes make a
Re: Business Application Framework
On 2015-08-12 23:35, Peter TB Brett wrote: On 2015-08-12 22:52, Richard Gaskin wrote: Now that we're talking about a much broader scope, and especially given the central role of VCS in fostering healthy open source work, my opinion is now more open than before, and somewhat undecided. If it turns out that we've had a great open source option the whole time and just never realized it, the situation is somewhat mitigated. Unfortunately this is not entirely true - lcVCS and similar approaches unfortunately suffer some serious flaws in day-to-day use. I don't know if lcVCS is available under GPL-compatible license, and if so that would seem a good option. But then again, if it's a good option why would LiveCode Ltd undertake the non-trivial expense of writing a completely different tool? The features required by lcVCS (i.e. exporting a stack in an array, and then storing on disk as an exploded format) seemed like very sensible engine features. i.e. They add something to the language beyond just giving you something which can be checked into VCS such as Git. I've always wanted to generalize the stackfile import/export process in the engine for a variety of reasons, and this was a good first step towards doing so. (Note that lcVCS could have been rehosted to use the import/export features that we were adding in the engine - it is only one piece of the VCS puzzle). It turned out to be impractical to do this any better than lcVCS does, and lcVCS is already free software that any of our users can use, so my project got shelved around Christmas 2014 [1]. If you want to see where I got to, go and look at: There was actually two reasons the project was shelved (the features are still 'useful' and I'm sure we will return to them at some point - if nothing else to abstract stack loading / saving in a way which makes it easy to store stacks in a variety of ways). The first reason was resources - we needed Peter's considerable skills elsewhere. In particular, helping out with LCB and the widget infrastructure... That project was seen as considerably more important to get done sooner as without the basics done and working, nobody could actually start writing widgets and such to validate the approach. So, Peter was moved to work on LCB and related aspects and as a result we got a version we could use considerably sooner than we would have otherwise. Of course, one could ask why VCS was considered to be less important and thus mean this shelving was considered. This is reason two. The reality is that lcVCS and our similar solution do not meet the goals that are required of collaborative development using VCS. Sorry. In order to do collaborative development using VCS it is not enough just to be able to put your files into git in a way where most merge conflicts can be mitigated (i.e. automatically resolved in a correct fashion). The format in which you see the files on git and, most importantly, as PRs have to be human-readable. This is where UUID based on-disk formats fail - given a PR and its patch it is exceptionally difficult to work out in which objects the changes are being made. Given that LiveCode allows (and indeeds encourages you!) to spread code out at various levels and in various objects - this is a killer. It means that, for all intents and purposes, doing code reviews on PRs that are submitted to GitHub is exceptionally difficult, if not impossible as you have to do significant amounts of clicking and prodding to find out which objects changes are being applied to. This flaw was actually pointed out by an engineer working on a project where they had attempted to use lcVCS when he was reviewing our version of the on-disk format. As the number of people on a project grows, there becomes even greater need for code reviews and management of the flow of patches and thus visibility and introspection on the patches by a human becomes even more important. (By the way it isn't just code reviews where this visibility of changes is exceptionally important - its also important when looking back through history in the commit logs to try and find where issues are introduced and other quality related issues). One of the goals of lcVCS-like solutions is to integrate with systems such as GitHub so that people can collaborate on LiveCode projects in the same way as they do for other languages, when you come to this point it suggests that either (1) there is a flaw in the idea of using a system such as GitHub as a way to VCS LiveCode stacks or (2) the current way LiveCode programs are written is hugely dVCS-averse (at least for modern software engineering workflows). We considered many options here. There was a general distaste for all of them - one would be to require unique object tags for objects in a stack to ensure you *can* see what objects are being patched. However, this puts a huge constraint on moving existing projects into the system,
Re: Business Application Framework
On 8/12/2015 4:35 PM, Peter TB Brett wrote: ## Business Application Framework != version control for stacks In the meantime, one of our developers explored an alternative approach to storing apps in version control. It becomes much easier when you constrain users to write and design their programs in a **totally** different way to traditional LiveCode apps. That's the Business Application Framework. It's a completely new approach to LiveCode version control, in that it doesn't even attempt to solve the problem of applying version control to LiveCode stacks. Thanks for being on the list and for posting this, it clarifies things considerably. -- 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: Business Application Framework
On 2015-08-13 09:07, Mark Waddingham wrote: On 2015-08-12 23:57, Monte Goulding wrote: As I said way back when, I'm not averse to Object UUIDs being added as metadata for the purposes of VCS (i.e. sideline data in objects). I'm still yet to be persuaded that replacing 'ids' with them is worthwhile as I think the problems being tried to solve by doing that are better solved in a different way (in particular augment properties in engine objects which take object id's to take stack / object name pairs). Highly relevant: I've already done most of the work required by the VCS use case. See https://github.com/runrev/livecode/pull/1590. Peter -- Dr Peter Brett peter.br...@livecode.com 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: Business Application Framework
The view of an Open Source User follows: I have come to LiveCode from SuperCard on the Mac and was attracted by the KickStarter campaign which would provide LC as Open Source. I contributed the minimum amount as LC is for my personnel use and I doubted the sincerity at the time. I did consider LC earlier than this but the product for me did not perform as well as SuperCard and I could not justify a licence, so Open Source was eventually the way in. I have also played with XOJO and obtained a license cheaply through a deal but that has now expired although the programme still works AND STILL COMPILES. When the XOJO licence expired I seriously considered renewing it because at I think 99$ for a Mac only licence, was reasonable value. I cannot justify the serious outlay for an Indie Licence in LC (annual) which would revert back to a potentially crippled Open Source version at expiry of the Licence. How many potential customers like me are LC missing out on? Financially I do not feel the pain because I only contributed a small amount but I do still feel cheated. I feel: The LC Management had this plan all along and deliberate kept it to themselves during the KickStarter Campaign. They would not have reached their goal if they had exposed their full plan during the KickStarter Campaign. If I was one of those who contributed major financial outlay to the KickStarter Campaign as a believer in Open Source I would be feeling really p*d with LC. LC are not really believers in Open Source, it was just a way to obtain money to keep the business going. That’s why I only contributed the minimum amount. I just had a feeling about it having watched LC from afar with their struggles with different licensing arrangements in the past. LC intend to limit the objects in LC Open Source and sell the others add add-ons. I am still not sure how this sits with Open Source? I believe the licence for businesses earning above an amount should be sufficient unless it’s these businesses who are cheating LC? LC will not gain more Licensees via. the Open Source route as people will not try LC if it is seen as crippled when compared to paid. Do LC now intend to provide a trial version of the paid LC? If I am typical of an Open Source user then LC will not gain anything rather the opposite. Because of this I am considering getting out altogether. They may have got something, if a cheaper licence was available but now they have no chance because If this comes to pass then I feel they are not trustworthy now or going forward. Continually changing the licensing arrangements for a product also leaves a potential licensee with a nagging doubt about the viability of the company, as to me it points to a company wrestling with ways to make more money to keep the business going. How long is acceptable before LC switches from Open Source to a paid only model? With perhaps a no longer updated Open Source LC available but kicked into the long grass. Anyway thats my 5p’s worth. I now await to be slammed by RG. I won’t take it seriously. All the best (and I mean it) 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
Re: Business Application Framework
On 2015-08-12 23:57, Monte Goulding wrote: Thanks for the details Peter. I had thought the BAF was a product of your work on the file format. I wonder if the current situation warrants a further investigation into the things that would assist my script based solution? Object UUIDs and more support for working out widget metadata without depending on ide code. There are two PRs pending (should get into 8 DP3) for widget support... The ability to export / import a widget's state array and a 'is really' operator. The latter let's you find out the precise type of a value, which is important for encoding in JSON in 7 onwards (since you can't tell the difference between binary strings and text strings, or numbers and strings in LCS due to auto-conversion). The PRs are: https://github.com/runrev/livecode/pull/2348 https://github.com/runrev/livecode/pull/2345 These should be sufficient to enable you to add widget export to lcVCS without having to talk to the IDE. As I said way back when, I'm not averse to Object UUIDs being added as metadata for the purposes of VCS (i.e. sideline data in objects). I'm still yet to be persuaded that replacing 'ids' with them is worthwhile as I think the problems being tried to solve by doing that are better solved in a different way (in particular augment properties in engine objects which take object id's to take stack / object name pairs). Mark. -- Mark Waddingham ~ m...@livecode.com ~ http://www.livecode.com/ LiveCode: Everyone can create apps ___ 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: Business Application Framework
Terence Heaford wrote: The view of an Open Source User follows: ... I cannot justify the serious outlay for an Indie Licence in LC As an open source user, why would you even consider the proprietary license? I now await to be slammed by RG. I won’t take it seriously. Who's slamming who there? What compels you to keep writing like that? -- 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: Business Application Framework
On 13 Aug 2015, at 09:39, Richard Gaskin ambassa...@fourthworld.com wrote: As an open source user, why would you even consider the proprietary license? Because if LC Open Source is limited in some way there may be something available in the paid product I would like to incorporate in an Open Source stack but cannot because it is has been crippled. As has been suggested by LC maybe I could implement it myself but as suggested it seems some have been naive in thinking that LC will keep feature parity between the Open Source and Paid versions. It has also been suggested that if it had not been for those that supported the Open Source version then the Paid version would no longer exist and there would be no Business Application Framework. The conclusion could be that it’s the Business User who is benefiting from the contributions of the Open Source backer and it’s the Open Source backer who is going to be penalised now and in the future. All the best 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
Re: Business Application Framework
To be fair it is a killer if you do not have such a front-end and want to have multiple people working in a rigorous way on a single LiveCode project ;) True but it’s not like there aren’t other funky file formats in GitHub… storyboard, xib etc.. nasty stuff. Keep the UI as code light as possible and the code in nicely named scriptified stacks and it’s reasonable as far as I can tell. You could even put in some commit hooks to enforce a rule on the script length of objects script to force code into these libraries... As I said, that option was discussed and I (personally) didn't think it too bad an idea in principal - but it wasn't considered a viable option at the time (it added another required layer to the system in order to ensure it met the requirements we had of it) and it did suggest that perhaps reconsidering the approach was the best way forward to producing a fully cohesive solution. It essentially reduces the git/github choice to being a storage backend which isn't really something for humans to look at. Our feeling at the time was that we really wanted a solution which was entirely 'natural' in GitHub. Is that ever going to happen though? There’s too much intermingled data, script and UI in LC to do that I think. From an engine perspective it is probably the underlying 'stackarr' encode/decode which is the critical piece which has much wider applicability and the bit which would be high on the list to finish first. It does for stacks and objects the same thing the 'styledText' array format does for fields - it allows you to naturally manipulate the structure of stacks using arrays in script in a very direct way. Much more easily then having to introspect directly on live objects and the lcVCS or stackdir import/export could be implemented in script based upon it. The 'stackarr' concept has benefits elsewhere too - for example the project browser has to extract the information describing an object to do its job, as does the property inspector; and I know there are lots of tools out there which also replicate exactly the same process in one way or another (lcVCS just being one example). That sounds good. Whatever works best/fastest. The actual file format is the boring part. It just needs to work whichever format it is. The IDE integration is the fun part. ___ 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: Business Application Framework
True but it’s not like there aren’t other funky file formats in GitHub… storyboard, xib etc.. nasty stuff. Keep the UI as code light as possible and the code in nicely named scriptified stacks and it’s reasonable as far as I can tell. You could even put in some commit hooks to enforce a rule on the script length of objects script to force code into these libraries... That's very true. Indeed, perhaps one could argue that GitHub needs service-hooks which allow customization of merging and diff display. That general feature there would solve the VCS problem in a natural way for a number of types of data which are needed in modern software projects. I suspect it will come in time as, to be fair, the integration abilities have increased a fair bit since we started using it in 2013; and we've used them quite extensively in our Vulcan (CI / Build System) integration so that information about PRs appear directly on the relevant PRs (and shout at you when you've made a mistake!). Is that ever going to happen though? There’s too much intermingled data, script and UI in LC to do that I think. I was chatting to Peter about that this morning - he is less optimistic about there being 'natural general solution' than I. He is probably, lamentably, right. Mark. -- Mark Waddingham ~ m...@livecode.com ~ http://www.livecode.com/ LiveCode: Everyone can create apps ___ 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: Business Application Framework
I’m not convinced it’s a killer. I just think it needs some special tools. It really wouldn’t be that hard to build a third party code review web app that integrated with GitHub via service hooks. Such a beast would know the export stack file format and present the objects in the same way the project browser does with visual representations etc. To be fair it is a killer if you do not have such a front-end and want to have multiple people working in a rigorous way on a single LiveCode project ;) As I said, that option was discussed and I (personally) didn't think it too bad an idea in principal - but it wasn't considered a viable option at the time (it added another required layer to the system in order to ensure it met the requirements we had of it) and it did suggest that perhaps reconsidering the approach was the best way forward to producing a fully cohesive solution. It essentially reduces the git/github choice to being a storage backend which isn't really something for humans to look at. Our feeling at the time was that we really wanted a solution which was entirely 'natural' in GitHub. Of course hindsight is 20/20 and perhaps the front-ending should be revisited to see how integrated and natural it could be made. GitHub is obviously an important and powerful force in the world of modern software development (whether Open or Closed), but we have to ensure that LiveCode's use of it does not seem 'perverse' - otherwise it just gives another reason for people not to consider LiveCode. (Given that LiveCode already 'goes against the grain' in a number of ways, we don't really want to make the job any harder!). From the point of view of the work Peter did put into VCS, none of it has been wasted. The 'stackdir' format we came up with is perhaps not the important point (I'm sure Monte, Peter and I could spend many hours finessing such a format to ensure it is bomb-proof, mitigates merge conflicts as much as possible and is actually tractable on modern FSs - Windows being a bit of a bear) - at the end of the day it just an on-disk representation of an in-memory data structure. From an engine perspective it is probably the underlying 'stackarr' encode/decode which is the critical piece which has much wider applicability and the bit which would be high on the list to finish first. It does for stacks and objects the same thing the 'styledText' array format does for fields - it allows you to naturally manipulate the structure of stacks using arrays in script in a very direct way. Much more easily then having to introspect directly on live objects and the lcVCS or stackdir import/export could be implemented in script based upon it. The 'stackarr' concept has benefits elsewhere too - for example the project browser has to extract the information describing an object to do its job, as does the property inspector; and I know there are lots of tools out there which also replicate exactly the same process in one way or another (lcVCS just being one example). Mark. -- Mark Waddingham ~ m...@livecode.com ~ http://www.livecode.com/ LiveCode: Everyone can create apps ___ 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: Business Application Framework
On 13 Aug 2015, at 5:50 pm, Peter TB Brett peter.br...@livecode.com wrote: On 2015-08-13 09:07, Mark Waddingham wrote: On 2015-08-12 23:57, Monte Goulding wrote: As I said way back when, I'm not averse to Object UUIDs being added as metadata for the purposes of VCS (i.e. sideline data in objects). I'm still yet to be persuaded that replacing 'ids' with them is worthwhile as I think the problems being tried to solve by doing that are better solved in a different way (in particular augment properties in engine objects which take object id's to take stack / object name pairs). Highly relevant: I've already done most of the work required by the VCS use case. See https://github.com/runrev/livecode/pull/1590. Thanks Peter! I’ll check it out tonight. ___ 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: Business Application Framework
On 13 Aug 2015, at 5:48 pm, Mark Waddingham m...@livecode.com wrote: This is where UUID based on-disk formats fail - given a PR and its patch it is exceptionally difficult to work out in which objects the changes are being made. Given that LiveCode allows (and indeeds encourages you!) to spread code out at various levels and in various objects - this is a killer. I’m not convinced it’s a killer. I just think it needs some special tools. It really wouldn’t be that hard to build a third party code review web app that integrated with GitHub via service hooks. Such a beast would know the export stack file format and present the objects in the same way the project browser does with visual representations etc. Having said that I would still recommend putting as much code as possible in scriptified stacks. 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: Business Application Framework
On 13 Aug 2015, at 09:39, Richard Gaskin ambassa...@fourthworld.com wrote: What compels you to keep writing like that? This is how I feel as an Open Source backer, let down. Now if I had been an open Source backer who laid out thousands for the principal of Open Source, let down would not begin to cover it. Many years of working in an environment far more confrontational than Software development has perhaps warped my senses somewhat but my concerns, to me, do seem to be materialising, albeit slowly. It feels like the drip, drip of a change that had been planned well in advance. All the best 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
Re: Business Application Framework
On 13 Aug 2015, at 9:09 pm, Mark Waddingham m...@livecode.com wrote: True but it’s not like there aren’t other funky file formats in GitHub… storyboard, xib etc.. nasty stuff. Keep the UI as code light as possible and the code in nicely named scriptified stacks and it’s reasonable as far as I can tell. You could even put in some commit hooks to enforce a rule on the script length of objects script to force code into these libraries... That's very true. Indeed, perhaps one could argue that GitHub needs service-hooks which allow customization of merging and diff display. That general feature there would solve the VCS problem in a natural way for a number of types of data which are needed in modern software projects. That would be nice… All we really need is a spot to display some the long name of the object. Getting the long name of an object given an properties or script file is a feature of my CLI. I also have a UI that shows modified objects etc in a tree. That doesn’t help on GitHub though obviously. For a while I was considering seeing how difficult it would be to add a some features for LC to GitLab but it really would be nicer to have a service that could work with any of the hosts. Is that ever going to happen though? There’s too much intermingled data, script and UI in LC to do that I think. I was chatting to Peter about that this morning - he is less optimistic about there being 'natural general solution' than I. He is probably, lamentably, right. One thing worth considering is as complex widgets develop the number of objects on a stack should reduce dramatically making it much easier to work out what you’re looking at. Combined with scriptified stacks it’s starting to look like a reasonable solution. ___ 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: Business Application Framework
On 13/08/15 07:02, Mark Wieder wrote: On 08/12/2015 10:01 AM, J. Landman Gay wrote: First, they are no longer Runtime Revolution or RunRev, they are LiveCode and have legally changed the company name. I don't think that's correct. The legal documents all say Runtime Revolution, Ltd. I don't see why this is important; it is just a distraction from other more serious questions. The artist formerly known as Prince was just the same when he was 'Prince' and when he was 'Squiggle': and his music was still great/awful regardless of which name he was using. 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: Business Application Framework
Thank you to everyone for all your input so far. Kickstarter was never intended to cover all development costs for everything we do. Software moves on, platforms move on, development continues at an astonishing speed in the digital world. Kickstarter was intended to fund extra developers to help deliver the clearly defined Kickstarter goals. It was also intended to allow you, the community, to contribute more, directly, to the development of LiveCode. We¹ve gone Open Source, done the refactor project, the last major piece needed to fulfill the remaining stretch goals is the extensibility of 8. That is maturing rapidly. We¹ve spent well over 2x the total we raised in getting to where we are now. A big component of that is the funds that come from our commercial licensing revenue. So from an Open Source backer perspective, you should be aware that we¹ve more than match funded the entire campaign so far! Yes, its taken longer than projected. This does not lessen our commitment to any of it. Be comforted by this calculation: delivering everything we've done so far *without* the crowdfunding campaigns we estimate would have taken us around 15 years. We've done it in two. Thank you. We said during Kickstarter that the product would be dual licensed. That means we have an Open Source Community Edition and a closed source Commercial Edition. We made it clear we would continue to have a commercial product. At no stage did we ever imply otherwise. We¹ve tweaked the product lineup periodically as lots of tech companies do. The Business License is an iteration on the Pro license which has been in the store for a long time. The Business Framework and the other business features we¹re working on have nothing to do with the Kickstarter goals. Indeed success with these initiatives simply mean we¹re in a position to further invest in Open Source, bringing many features that go beyond the original Kickstarter goals. And with the extensibility coming in 8, we expect to see far more code contributions and community created widgets. That whole process will be far easier and offer much greater flexibility to those of you that want to get more involved in the Community side of things. Anyone who knows us knows that we wouldn¹t do something like going Open Source if it wasn¹t something we believed in. The fact that we have delivered, and will continue to deliver, the vast majority of our effort in that way speaks for itself and will continue to do so. You chose to back a commercial company, and we have a responsibility to everyone to run a viable organization that properly services the needs of our whole user base. There is never a perfect way to please absolutely everyone, compromises have to be made along the way. We continue to consult our user base very widely, listen to feedback and carefully weigh things up so we can balance the needs of as many in our community as we possibly can. We¹ve done that, for the most part successfully for many years. That is what we are going to continue to do. Kind regards, Kevin Kevin Miller ~ ke...@livecode.com ~ http://www.livecode.com/ LiveCode: Everyone can create apps ___ 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: Business Application Framework
On 13 Aug 2015, at 13:58, Kevin Miller ke...@livecode.com wrote: We said during Kickstarter that the product would be dual licensed. That means we have an Open Source Community Edition and a closed source Commercial Edition. We made it clear we would continue to have a commercial product. At no stage did we ever imply otherwise. I for one have never doubted this but…. Did you advise the Open Source backers at any point prior to or during the KickStarter campaign that the Commercial product would be different than the Open Source product except in the area of code protection? I think this is the area where people are doubting the future of the Open Source product. You may have said nothing about this and this is the “naivety referred to in a number of posts. All the best 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
Re: Business Application Framework
Yes. Perhaps it would help to understand this in context if you look some more at how some other dual licensed open source projects are run. Kind regards, Kevin Kevin Miller ~ ke...@livecode.com ~ http://www.livecode.com/ LiveCode: Everyone can create apps On 13/08/2015 14:15, Terence Heaford t.heaf...@icloud.com wrote: On 13 Aug 2015, at 13:58, Kevin Miller ke...@livecode.com wrote: We said during Kickstarter that the product would be dual licensed. That means we have an Open Source Community Edition and a closed source Commercial Edition. We made it clear we would continue to have a commercial product. At no stage did we ever imply otherwise. I for one have never doubted this but. Did you advise the Open Source backers at any point prior to or during the KickStarter campaign that the Commercial product would be different than the Open Source product except in the area of code protection? I think this is the area where people are doubting the future of the Open Source product. You may have said nothing about this and this is the ³naivety referred to in a number of posts. All the best 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: Business Application Framework
LiveCode is unusual in many ways. If there are anomalies with how it integrates with VCSes designed for very different languages that would really be the least of our concerns. Indeed - that is a good way to look at it. If accommodating other people's expectations of normal were a priority we might as well use dot notation. :) Touché. Lets do what we can with what we have. That seems like a wise approach. Ultimately, our own internal foray into the general stackfile VCS problem means that there are now more people with intimate knowledge of it, including possibilities and pitfalls, which can only be a good thing. Mark. -- Mark Waddingham ~ m...@livecode.com ~ http://www.livecode.com/ LiveCode: Everyone can create apps ___ 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: Business Application Framework
Monte Goulding wrote: One thing worth considering is as complex widgets develop the number of objects on a stack should reduce dramatically making it much easier to work out what you’re looking at. Combined with scriptified stacks it’s starting to look like a reasonable solution. LiveCode is unusual in many ways. If there are anomalies with how it integrates with VCSes designed for very different languages that would really be the least of our concerns. If accommodating other people's expectations of normal were a priority we might as well use dot notation. :) Lets do what we can with what we have. A good plan violently executed now is better than a perfect plan executed next week. - Gen. George S. Patton -- Richard Gaskin Fourth World Systems Software Design and Development for the Desktop, Mobile, and the Web ambassa...@fourthworld.comhttp://www.FourthWorld.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: Business Application Framework
Aloha, Kevin: A well considered response. I'll be with you for the long haul, no question about that. Please do consider - hear our pleas for tools that are expected out of the box in an open source arena 1) long, long, long, long standing request SFTP on board. Make a widget fo that asap and there will be cheers in digital heaven. LC is probably the only app I have on my box that still cannot make a secure file transfer to a web server. Even silly little things like Skitch screen saver can SFTP to our web server. I'm planning to use Richards idea of shell + keys.. but I have to go around to all the work stations here and make keys for everyone on the team.. I shouldn't have to do that. 2) Clearly a collaborative environment is significant. I follow with interest the brilliant discussion between Monte and Mark... stacks are a multi-armed beastie and we appreciate the challenges there. 3) Work needs to continue on the IDE to bring it up to the high end graphical interface content creation standards of today's world. IMHO you need to put more energy there... a small focus team of graphic designers who think in terms of building love eye candy. hammering on the IDE would get you a long way in a short time. Nasty things like not being able to set the vertical height of a label in a button, because you don't keep the line height property exposed in the inspector.. etc... these all need fixed... and don't required any engine changes... my long standing rant that you really need to make it easier to build elegant looking UI can all be easily implement via the IDE with few changes in the engine MVC and object oriented etc are a bit over my head... I look forward to finding out exactly what that means. I use revIgniter, so I understand the concepts, but we will watch with interest on developments. Since you are committed to a multi-level license scheme.. You could consider an interim space between indy and BAF, where those tools are made available to individual developers and non-profits for a slightly increased annual subscription fee. God knows we pay Abode, and our accounting software vendors a lot more than we ever pay RunRev.. so I'm sure I could live with a price increase for some kind of license like that. Of course I don't even understand what the BAF offers yet, so this is all speculation. Yes, we need to all appreciate the requirements for you to have a revenue stream, not only to drive the product forward, but so your team can put money into their kids educational funds and have enough expendable cash to enjoy life. Sometimes when I see the open source complaints I wonder if they forget there are real people in Scotland who have to put food on the table at home. So I'm with you there. The player object seems to be moving forward, thank you. I look forward to testing the new on in 7.1 Many blessings from Hawaii. May you succeed in these goals! Swasti Astu, Be Well! Brahmanathaswami Kevin Miller wrote: Thank you to everyone for all your input so far. Kickstarter was never intended to cover all development costs for everything we do. Software moves on, platforms move on, development continues at an astonishing speed in the digital world. Kickstarter was intended to fund extra developers to help deliver the clearly defined Kickstarter goals. It was also intended to allow you, the community, to contribute more, directly, to the development of LiveCode. We¹ve gone Open Source, done the refactor project, the last major piece needed to fulfill the remaining stretch goals is the extensibility of 8. That is maturing rapidly. We¹ve spent well over 2x the total we raised in getting to where we are now. A big component of that is the funds that come from our commercial licensing revenue. So from an Open Source backer perspective, you should be aware that we¹ve more than match funded the entire campaign so far! Yes, its taken longer than projected. This does not lessen our commitment to any of it. Be comforted by this calculation: delivering everything we've done so far *without* the crowdfunding campaigns we estimate would have taken us around 15 years. We've done it in two. Thank you. We said during Kickstarter that the product would be dual licensed. That means we have an Open Source Community Edition and a closed source Commercial Edition. We made it clear we would continue to have a commercial product. At no stage did we ever imply otherwise. We¹ve tweaked the product lineup periodically as lots of tech companies do. The Business License is an iteration on the Pro license which has been in the store for a long time. The Business Framework and the other business features we¹re working on have nothing to do with the Kickstarter goals. Indeed success with these initiatives simply mean we¹re in a position to further invest in Open Source, bringing many features that go beyond the original Kickstarter goals. And with the extensibility coming
Re: Business Application Framework
+1 Hi all, Kevin mentioned in his orignal mail: … and a PDF Viewer. Please, please, please also give this one to „the masses“! We’ve been waiting for this for ages. Best Klaus -- Klaus Major http://www.major-k.de kl...@major-k.de ___ 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: Business Application Framework
Hi all, Kevin mentioned in his orignal mail: … and a PDF Viewer. Please, please, please also give this one to „the masses“! We’ve been waiting for this for ages. Best Klaus -- Klaus Major http://www.major-k.de kl...@major-k.de ___ 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: Business Application Framework
+2 Very important. Bill On Aug 13, 2015, at 11:33 AM, Richmond richmondmathew...@gmail.com wrote: +1 Hi all, Kevin mentioned in his orignal mail: … and a PDF Viewer. Please, please, please also give this one to „the masses“! We’ve been waiting for this for ages. Best Klaus -- Klaus Major http://www.major-k.de kl...@major-k.de ___ 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: Business Application Framework
+1 William Prothero wrote That said: I love the application and am grateful for it every day that I use it. Ralph DiMola IT Director Evergreen Information Services rdim...@evergreeninfo.net ___ 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: Business Application Framework
+2 also Ralph DiMola IT Director Evergreen Information Services rdim...@evergreeninfo.net -Original Message- From: use-livecode [mailto:use-livecode-boun...@lists.runrev.com] On Behalf Of William Prothero Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2015 3:59 PM To: Use-livecode Use-livecode Subject: Re: Business Application Framework +2 Very important. Bill On Aug 13, 2015, at 11:33 AM, Richmond richmondmathew...@gmail.com wrote: +1 Hi all, Kevin mentioned in his orignal mail: … and a PDF Viewer. Please, please, please also give this one to „the masses“! We’ve been waiting for this for ages. Best Klaus -- Klaus Major http://www.major-k.de kl...@major-k.de ___ 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 ___ 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: Business Application Framework
The big response on this topic illustrates to me that the community is very concerned about the possibility of a two-tiered livecode environment where we need to pay extra to get added premium features that we all will want. Personally, I am very happy with the direction and work that the dev team has taken so far, especially considering my past experience with Adobe Director. But, I confess to a worry about a possible “bait and switch” outcome, which I don’t really think is the intention, but the announcement was worded in a way that allowed for this interpretation by a community exposed to this tactic by other software companies. How many “Free” games have we downloaded, only to find that it costs more to actually play? It seems reasonable that the livecode enterprise is continuing to evolve their business plan, and that as it evolves, new changes will occur. Hopefully the comments and reactions on this topic will inform and help the enterprise communicate plan effectively for the future. The worst outcome, of course, would be for the enterprise to go “belly up” and we then are all abandoned. So, I am hoping they find a great business plan that they can present to the community in a clear way that is as understandable as possible. That said: I love the application and am grateful for it every day that I use it. Regards, Bill William A. Prothero http://es.earthednet.org/ On Aug 13, 2015, at 12:58 PM, William Prothero proth...@earthednet.org wrote: +2 Very important. Bill On Aug 13, 2015, at 11:33 AM, Richmond richmondmathew...@gmail.com wrote: +1 Hi all, Kevin mentioned in his orignal mail: … and a PDF Viewer. Please, please, please also give this one to „the masses“! We’ve been waiting for this for ages. Best Klaus -- Klaus Major http://www.major-k.de kl...@major-k.de ___ 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 ___ 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: Business Application Framework
On 08/13/2015 04:09 AM, Mark Waddingham wrote: That's very true. Indeed, perhaps one could argue that GitHub needs service-hooks which allow customization of merging and diff display. That general feature there would solve the VCS problem in a natural way for a number of types of data which are needed in modern software projects. I don't get that. While I rely on github as a common repository, I also use my local repository a lot more often, as does the rest of my team. Merging and diffing tools on github would be nice-to-haves, but don't solve the problems locally of resolving merge conflicts, running gitx, git-blame, etc. -- Mark Wieder ahsoftw...@gmail.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: Business Application Framework
On 08/13/2015 10:45 AM, Richard Gaskin wrote: A good plan violently executed now is better than a perfect plan executed next week. - Gen. George S. Patton plans are useless, but planning is indispensable. - Gen. Dwight D. Eisenhower -- Mark Wieder ahsoftw...@gmail.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: Business Application Framework
On August 13, 2015 8:15:44 AM CDT, Terence Heaford t.heaf...@icloud.com wrote: Did you advise the Open Source backers at any point prior to or during the KickStarter campaign that the Commercial product would be different than the Open Source product except in the area of code protection? Brett's post cleared this up for me. The new BAF requires that stacks are written differently than they are now, and it won't work with existing stacks. It is a new product that requires a different development approach. The current community and commercial editions remain in parity. -- 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: Business Application Framework
On 08/12/2015 05:48 AM, Andrew Kluthe wrote: An object-oriented framework for livecode now featuring GIT support? Does anyone have any more information on this announcement I received? ? -- Mark Wieder ahsoftw...@gmail.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: Business Application Framework
I would also find it very disappointing, after locking in 3 years of Indy license, to find that addon licenses were required to access some set of wonderful new livecode features. That said, I'm a single developer, so git isn't important to me. Also, if the purpose of the Indy license was to support single developers, working alone, would git be particularly attractive? Just asking. Bill William Prothero http://es.earthednet.org On Aug 12, 2015, at 8:02 AM, Peter Haworth p...@lcsql.com wrote: I got an email from Kevin about it yesterday. On Wed, Aug 12, 2015, 7:52 AM Brahmanathaswami, Sannyasin bra...@hindu.org wrote: On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 2:48 AM, Andrew Kluthe and...@ctech.me wrote: I think git support without having to fiddle around too much would be pretty important to an open source community. Where did this announcement appear? I haven't seen it in my email and it's not in my spam. I have to agree. I have paid (and paid and paid) RunRev from the very day (even before Kevin went live with the new company and was still transitioning from Scott's admin) for every offer to help with their cash flow into the future by buying into what is now an indy license for X number of years into the future. (I think I am up to 2021 now.) putting a lot of faith in this company, and convincing stakeholders, who hold the purse strings, that we can trust and depend on Kevin and his team going into the future... and now, to be told that to have a collaborative environment... we have to pay again.. this is a) very disappointing b) IMHO very bad strategy: while I appreciate and respect HQ's need for a revenue stream (as witnessed by my commitment to ever single long term offer the company ever made, including open source.) I don't think this a good strategy for the future of the product/language. All the other big guns, Node, Ruby, Javascript, PHP... you can just open a GIT account and go to work... but here we sit working on a stack pondering how we can share this with a colleague... I was just thinking about this the other day and wondering if we need resurrect Magic Carpet and us some kind or RCS for stack development collaboration. It would work, but still rather primitive in terms of being able to fork, regression options etc. Kevin stated on video in Southern California that he wanted LiveCode to be one of the 10 most popular used languages in the field. Locking collaboration behind a paywall is certainly going to kill that goal for sure. I suggest a different model for an additional revenue stream, one that is used by a fellow UK engineering team (Chris Graham) that runs the very successful OC Portal php CMS: Sell credit hours for support. e.g. you charge $25.00 per hour for support. I buy 10 hours.. pay LC $250.00. Check out OC Portal support model... best we have ever seen for a software product. If I need help HQ helps me until my hours run out. In Chris's case (high integrity factor there) if it is a bug in the software, he will not dock your credit hours. If your request is a feature request.. and it take him 20 hours to get it done... he does not bill you for the extra ten... why? Because he figures that the dialogue with his client about the new feature was a win-win since now OC Portal has a cool new widget/feature that enhances the product for everyone else and future prospects. His paid support clients are helping him build and build and build the product. Where is the announcement? ___ 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: Business Application Framework
On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 2:48 AM, Andrew Kluthe and...@ctech.me wrote: I think git support without having to fiddle around too much would be pretty important to an open source community. Where did this announcement appear? I haven't seen it in my email and it's not in my spam. I have to agree. I have paid (and paid and paid) RunRev from the very day (even before Kevin went live with the new company and was still transitioning from Scott's admin) for every offer to help with their cash flow into the future by buying into what is now an indy license for X number of years into the future. (I think I am up to 2021 now.) putting a lot of faith in this company, and convincing stakeholders, who hold the purse strings, that we can trust and depend on Kevin and his team going into the future... and now, to be told that to have a collaborative environment... we have to pay again.. this is a) very disappointing b) IMHO very bad strategy: while I appreciate and respect HQ's need for a revenue stream (as witnessed by my commitment to ever single long term offer the company ever made, including open source.) I don't think this a good strategy for the future of the product/language. All the other big guns, Node, Ruby, Javascript, PHP... you can just open a GIT account and go to work... but here we sit working on a stack pondering how we can share this with a colleague... I was just thinking about this the other day and wondering if we need resurrect Magic Carpet and us some kind or RCS for stack development collaboration. It would work, but still rather primitive in terms of being able to fork, regression options etc. Kevin stated on video in Southern California that he wanted LiveCode to be one of the 10 most popular used languages in the field. Locking collaboration behind a paywall is certainly going to kill that goal for sure. I suggest a different model for an additional revenue stream, one that is used by a fellow UK engineering team (Chris Graham) that runs the very successful OC Portal php CMS: Sell credit hours for support. e.g. you charge $25.00 per hour for support. I buy 10 hours.. pay LC $250.00. Check out OC Portal support model... best we have ever seen for a software product. If I need help HQ helps me until my hours run out. In Chris's case (high integrity factor there) if it is a bug in the software, he will not dock your credit hours. If your request is a feature request.. and it take him 20 hours to get it done... he does not bill you for the extra ten... why? Because he figures that the dialogue with his client about the new feature was a win-win since now OC Portal has a cool new widget/feature that enhances the product for everyone else and future prospects. His paid support clients are helping him build and build and build the product. Where is the announcement? ___ 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: Business Application Framework
I got an email from Kevin about it yesterday. On Wed, Aug 12, 2015, 7:52 AM Brahmanathaswami, Sannyasin bra...@hindu.org wrote: On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 2:48 AM, Andrew Kluthe and...@ctech.me wrote: I think git support without having to fiddle around too much would be pretty important to an open source community. Where did this announcement appear? I haven't seen it in my email and it's not in my spam. I have to agree. I have paid (and paid and paid) RunRev from the very day (even before Kevin went live with the new company and was still transitioning from Scott's admin) for every offer to help with their cash flow into the future by buying into what is now an indy license for X number of years into the future. (I think I am up to 2021 now.) putting a lot of faith in this company, and convincing stakeholders, who hold the purse strings, that we can trust and depend on Kevin and his team going into the future... and now, to be told that to have a collaborative environment... we have to pay again.. this is a) very disappointing b) IMHO very bad strategy: while I appreciate and respect HQ's need for a revenue stream (as witnessed by my commitment to ever single long term offer the company ever made, including open source.) I don't think this a good strategy for the future of the product/language. All the other big guns, Node, Ruby, Javascript, PHP... you can just open a GIT account and go to work... but here we sit working on a stack pondering how we can share this with a colleague... I was just thinking about this the other day and wondering if we need resurrect Magic Carpet and us some kind or RCS for stack development collaboration. It would work, but still rather primitive in terms of being able to fork, regression options etc. Kevin stated on video in Southern California that he wanted LiveCode to be one of the 10 most popular used languages in the field. Locking collaboration behind a paywall is certainly going to kill that goal for sure. I suggest a different model for an additional revenue stream, one that is used by a fellow UK engineering team (Chris Graham) that runs the very successful OC Portal php CMS: Sell credit hours for support. e.g. you charge $25.00 per hour for support. I buy 10 hours.. pay LC $250.00. Check out OC Portal support model... best we have ever seen for a software product. If I need help HQ helps me until my hours run out. In Chris's case (high integrity factor there) if it is a bug in the software, he will not dock your credit hours. If your request is a feature request.. and it take him 20 hours to get it done... he does not bill you for the extra ten... why? Because he figures that the dialogue with his client about the new feature was a win-win since now OC Portal has a cool new widget/feature that enhances the product for everyone else and future prospects. His paid support clients are helping him build and build and build the product. Where is the announcement? ___ 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: Business Application Framework
That said, I'm a single developer, so git isn't important to me. Also, if the purpose of the Indy license was to support single developers, working alone, would git be particularly attractive? Just asking. Bill That makes sense to me, Bill. I cannot comment specifically on the Business Application Framework, but if we are talking specifically about team features, aren't team features contrary to the idea of an indie license - which to me, suggests working on your own projects as an indie developer. Best regards, Lynn Fredricks President Paradigma Software http://www.paradigmasoft.com Valentina SQL Server: The Ultra-fast, Royalty Free Database Server ___ 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: Business Application Framework
Here is the email arriving from Kevin yesterday... Subject: Something Big I want to improve your business, your cash flow, and your development work. To do this, we launched a new Business Application Framework. This framework brings object-oriented programming to LiveCode, is compatible with GIT and other version management systems, and allows you to do your LiveCoding work in teams. Go ahead, do a happy dance. We're also introducing the new Business License with bolt-on features. Business License bolt-ons include Guaranteed 2 Business Day Email Support, Business Application Framework, Data Synchronization Framework, Priority Bug Fix, Phone Skype Hotline Access, and PDF Viewer. When you purchase a new Business License, you receive credits with which you can purchase Business bolt-ons. *If you purchase the Business License now, you will receive 20 bolt-on tokens (Most major bolt-ons will start at 10 tokens. However, some bolt-ons may be available for as little as one token). This offer will not last forever and when it ends, each Business License will only come with 10 bolt-on tokens. You can, of course, purchase additional tokens at any time.* For an additional cost, you can access exclusive rights to our Services, including Hack Days, Priority Feature Add, Code Reviews, and Code Documentation Services, to name a few. *You can read more about the new Business License and purchase it with 20 tokens here:* https://livecode.com/products/livecode-platform/livecode-for-business/ http://livecode.us7.list-manage1.com/track/click?u=8404b344b09103bf489dd8a9aid=32dead928de=cd4713 Our goal with our new business features and benefits is to empower you to leverage the productivity and ease-of-use advantages that you enjoy with LiveCode across much larger projects. As a provider of an amazing tool, we want to become your trusted partner and be there to ensure your entire app development experience is a huge success. I look forward to working together. Kind Regards, Kevin Miller PS - Of course, if you have an existing business license, you can continue to the end of your current term before moving to the new Business License. If you wish, you may upgrade to the new Business License immediately for the difference in price and receive the new benefits before the end of your current term. It's up to you! Any further questions regarding business license transitions can be sent to: busin...@livecode.com. On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 11:33 AM, Lynn Fredricks lfredri...@proactive-intl.com wrote: That said, I'm a single developer, so git isn't important to me. Also, if the purpose of the Indy license was to support single developers, working alone, would git be particularly attractive? Just asking. Bill That makes sense to me, Bill. I cannot comment specifically on the Business Application Framework, but if we are talking specifically about team features, aren't team features contrary to the idea of an indie license - which to me, suggests working on your own projects as an indie developer. Best regards, Lynn Fredricks President Paradigma Software http://www.paradigmasoft.com Valentina SQL Server: The Ultra-fast, Royalty Free Database Server ___ 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: Business Application Framework
I don’t completely understand the Business Aoolication Framework. I am talking about the business license version being able to use different versions such as the open source version. Does the open source version have code that people shave contributed to improving that is not part of the paid versions and if you have a business licennse you can use those features and make your code closed source while other are required to provide code fpr their programs developed with open source. If that is the case it seems like you are cheating the open source community by allowing others to use it in ways those who developed it are not allied to use it. If that is the case it would seem to me those using a business license should be held to the same rules open source users are held to with any parts of the code that uses open source versions. John Balgenorth ; ___ 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: Business Application Framework
Matthias Rebbe wrote: Am 12.08.2015 um 21:33 schrieb Richard Gaskin: Kevin Miller wrote: If you want VCS in the Open Source Community or Indy edition, there is already lcVCS out there Where? The only lcVCS i am aware of is the free lcVCS plugin from Monte. You can download it at his site at http://www.mergext.com. But you have to register first. I didn't see it there, and using the site's Search box yielded 0 results for lcvcs. Did I just miss it? Is there another option in the community that doesn't require email harvesting? -- 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: Business Application Framework
It's open source Richard. Anyone can distribute it. I just choose to distribute binaries of my open source stuff via mergExt for obvious reasons Sent from my iPhone On 13 Aug 2015, at 6:31 am, Richard Gaskin ambassa...@fourthworld.com wrote: Is there another option in the community that doesn't require email harvesting? ___ 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: Business Application Framework
1. Why hasn't this been more widely promoted? It's only been promoted on the lists, forums and Facebook. For a while RunRev were going to buy it, then they decided to do their own so I stopped pushing ahead with lcVCS as it appeared to be a waste of time. Now this and maybe it's back in the game.. Not sure yet. 2. Why hasn't it been submitted to the only resource-sharing tool we have built into the IDE? I'm not sure I've ever looked in there... Is it worthwhile? Before you get excited lcVCS doesn't support LC 8 yet because I'd need to depend on IDE code to do it at the moment and that seems risky. That and there appeared to be no point working on it until today... ___ 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: Business Application Framework
Le 12 août 2015 à 19:01, Kevin Miller ke...@livecode.com a écrit : The Business Application Framework is a framework for writing more serious applications in LiveCode. It is far more than simply adding ³GitHub to LiveCode. It brings in advanced concepts such as object-orientation, a model-view controller architecture and hooks into data sync and other heavyweight features. It is not for everyone. If you are an individual building an application then you might want to evaluate whether its worth the extra effort, level of complexity and abstractions associated with using it. IMHO, beside the GPL3 license availability, LiveCode fully merits such its Business Application Framework, with, « cerise sur le gateau », both OOP and Functional Programming official support ! Warm Regards, -- Pierre Sahores mobile : 06 03 95 77 70 www.sahores-conseil.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: Business Application Framework
Kevin Miller wrote: The Business Application Framework is a framework for writing more serious applications in LiveCode. Am I the only one who feels a wee bit insulted? OK, OK, I know that I am a very small frog in the relatively large LiveCode pond . . . but I consider my /Devawriter /serious, even if nobody else does. Is this statement to be taken to imply that only applications built for business are to be taken seriously? Now a very large number of people who contribute [Hey, there's a word which might well be shouted around a bit; 'contribute' along with 'community'] to the Use-List and the Forums are involved in far more serious programming exercises than I am, if by 'serious' we mean programs that go in for really 'heavy lifting' - I wonder? If you want features for free then you can make them, or look to see if they are part of our extensive crowd-funded road map and thus either being provided or coming shortly. If you want us to provide things outside of that then yes, it costs money for us to make them. Well, I am sure it costs money for us to make them, but then, I don't live in Britain any longer and am out of the loop where everybody talks to everybody as if they are blithering idiots (saw a load more of this in England 2 weeks ago: hence this being written on the back of a jar of peanut butter: May contain nuts). Now how are we simple folk to tell what are 'features' (i.e stuff that is to be bolted on), and what are just standard parts of LiveCode? As far as I understood all the hype surrounding the Open Source drive for the Kickstarter the whole idea was that we would put money into a pot, and then both that and any subsequent contributions, whether money, code snippets, or 'features' we authored would be rolled into LiveCode for the common good of 'the community'. coming shortly . . . um, Ms Gay . . . so NOT all of the items on the road map are ready yet; no need to look at the roadmap - Kevin has told us. Options like this framework, together with things like the technical support options, might be a big help in getting additional value and productivity advantages from the platform. additional value and productivity advantages are just ad-man-speak: we can all walk the walk and talk the talk if we need to, but those phrases are ethereal and almost semantically empty. What the heck is a productivity advantage when it is at home? Do you mean things will move more quickly, be easier to program??? Well, if so, say so. might: first rule of reading stuff: never trust a modal verb. for now, they are aimed carefully at the needs of our more serious business customers. Aha . . . so, presumably, LiveCode (the company formerly known as RunRev) held an open, and above board consultation session that was properly documented with its/their more serious business customers??? Where does that leave the other business customers? The ones that, by implication, LiveCode considers foolish and lacking in the level of seriousness to warrant consultation. VCS has already been pointed out by Richard Gaskin . . . out there . . . why do I feel that somebody somewhere is being played for a fool? That fool is not me; I'm already the unofficial LiveCode court jester, and I am doing my happy dance here with my stick with a pig's bladder on the end of it. Oh, and I real wonder how serious business customers are going to seriously consider a message that uses such an infantile phrase as a happy dance in it? However, I do realise that there are several things quite seriously wrong with me: 1. Every time condescending, arrogant puff comes out of the mothership I am incapable of keeping my mouth shut. 2. I am, as Andrew Kluth mentioned just now, a fanboy insofar as I think LiveCode is just about the best programming/coding IDE/RAD? whateveryoucallit there is, and it is a fantastic tool to introduce programming to children. 3. I don't have 25 million pounds so I can buy out LiveCode and boss them around instead. 4. I think LiveCode have seriously [hey, there's that word again] lost the plot in several important ways. 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: Business Application Framework
On 2015-08-12 22:52, Richard Gaskin wrote: Now that we're talking about a much broader scope, and especially given the central role of VCS in fostering healthy open source work, my opinion is now more open than before, and somewhat undecided. If it turns out that we've had a great open source option the whole time and just never realized it, the situation is somewhat mitigated. I don't know if lcVCS is available under GPL-compatible license, and if so that would seem a good option. But then again, if it's a good option why would LiveCode Ltd undertake the non-trivial expense of writing a completely different tool? These are open questions, for which I currently have no answer. ## Current state of version control for stacks I spent the first few months after joining LiveCode attempting to implement a scheme which would allow *any* LiveCode app -- no matter how complicated -- to be stored in a format that could be reliably and safely stored in a version control system and losslessly converted to and from traditional LiveCode stacks. It turned out to be impractical to do this any better than lcVCS does, and lcVCS is already free software that any of our users can use, so my project got shelved around Christmas 2014 [1]. If you want to see where I got to, go and look at: * https://github.com/peter-b/livecode/tree/feature-stackdir -- full spec + implementation for on-disk format * https://github.com/peter-b/livecode/tree/feature-stackarr -- partial implementation of stack (de)serialisation It's entirely free software, and anyone can take the code and finish the job. ## Business Application Framework != version control for stacks In the meantime, one of our developers explored an alternative approach to storing apps in version control. It becomes much easier when you constrain users to write and design their programs in a **totally** different way to traditional LiveCode apps. That's the Business Application Framework. It's a completely new approach to LiveCode version control, in that it doesn't even attempt to solve the problem of applying version control to LiveCode stacks. It is probably also worth mentioning that the Business Application Framework is written entirely in LiveCode. It's built using features that are available to everyone as free software in the community edition. Specifically, those features are: text based file I/O, string manipulation, and script-only stacks. Peter [1] Since then, I've been working on LiveCode Builder, HTML5, and various quality assurance things (including a continuous integration bot written in pure LCB -- no LiveCode engine needed!) -- Dr Peter Brett peter.br...@livecode.com 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: Business Application Framework
Personally still waiting for the Reworked Multimedia Support.. https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1755283828/open-source-edition-of-livecode/posts?page=4 The current audio support is archaic and it's still not possible to easily record audio on mobile. regards alex On 13/08/2015 5:05 am, J. Landman Gay wrote: On 8/12/2015 1:53 PM, Richmond wrote: But I am sure I am not the only person who suffers from this confusion . . . I wonder why? Maybe you missed the roadmap: https://livecode.com/resources/roadmap/ Now that I re-read it, the physics engine is in there too. ___ 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: Business Application Framework
Thanks for the details Peter. I had thought the BAF was a product of your work on the file format. I wonder if the current situation warrants a further investigation into the things that would assist my script based solution? Object UUIDs and more support for working out widget metadata without depending on ide code. Sent from my iPhone On 13 Aug 2015, at 7:35 am, Peter TB Brett peter.br...@livecode.com wrote: ## Current state of version control for stacks ___ 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: Business Application Framework
On 12/08/15 22:51, Lyn Teyla wrote: Hi all, I agree with many of the posters to this thread thus far that it would appear to be a mistake to offer, at this time, solely with the Business license, additional features such as built-in GIT compatibility, OOP and MVC. I would go one step further and suggest, if I may, that it might, perhaps ;), be a good idea to have feature parity across all licenses, with the sole exception being password protection (but only due to its obvious incompatibility with the GPL). This is what everybody expected when the Open Source version of LiveCode was released. Having feature parity would serve not only to reduce confusion, but also to allow the entire LiveCode community (paid + open source) to flourish more rapidly, which is one of the goals of LiveCode Ltd. These announced additional features are useful to many, not just Business licensees. Just the built-in GIT compatibility alone, for example, would bring about the following benefits: 1. The open source community would flourish, with both individuals and groups all over the world sharing their code on GitHub. People link to their GitHub pages from their websites. Many would come to know that LiveCode is such an easy yet powerful language. This is a free and potent marketing channel i.e. more $$$ for LiveCode Ltd. 2. GIT is not only useful for groups, but also individuals, including Indy licensees. GIT is utilized for version control, with users benefiting from the automatic documentation of code changes, which is valuable for a wide variety of projects. 3. The presence of public GitHub repositories allows LiveCode to project a more professional image to the coding community and decision makers at all levels, including single-member decision makers, attracting those who would not otherwise have considered LiveCode as a candidate for their projects. So again, more $$$ for LiveCode Ltd. 4. Developers who are familiar with other languages and GIT would find built-in GIT compatibility to be a plus, and the lack of one (and having to use a third-party tool for such) to be a minus. More developers = more $$$ for LiveCode Ltd. 5. GitHub pages are known to be an excellent way for developers to attract prospective employers. More employment opportunities = happier developers = happier employers = even more $$$ for LiveCode Ltd. With regard to object-orientation and MVC: 1. Whilst such concepts might sound imposing to some, it helps draw programmers who are already familiar with these concepts, and who expect to find them in any professional language offering. Here's an example: https://www.linkedin.com/grp/post/50811-5908638845246656513 2. As with built-in GIT compatibility, just having these features would help bolster LiveCode's image to just about everyone — developers, the general public, and decision makers alike. 3. For users who think these features are unnecessary or too complicated, they could always choose not to use them, just as they don't use any other feature that they don't want, while users who need them can jump right in — everyone's happy. With regard to bringing more value to the Business license: 1. There might not be a need to do that using features specifically. Since there are the the $500K + single-member restrictions for Indy licensees, those who get a Business license get it not because they want more features. They're making more money, are legally obliged to pay more, can afford to do so, and therefore do so. 2. I agree with Brahmanathaswami that a good way to differentiate the Business license is the inclusion of a higher level of support (which was indeed already mentioned in the announcement). Since Business licensees pay more, they're entitled to enhanced and priority service. Sounds reasonable. With the above in mind, in the following comparison chart: https://livecode.com/products/livecode-platform/pricing/ Feature parity would mean making the following items available to all licenses (green ticks across all columns): - Business App Framework (which could be renamed as appropriate) - Cloud Data Sync - PDF Viewer - Mobile camera support All other Business-only items (enhanced support and services) would remain untouched. I believe the increase in the number of coders using LiveCode as a result of implementing feature parity would result in benefits to LiveCode's bottomline that far outweigh anything (if any) that would be gained by offering certain features only to Business licensees. This is because doing the latter would possibly serve mainly to alienate the open source community (no expected features like GIT, OOP and MVC) as well as Indy licensees (ditto, plus the recent increase in price). At the same time, the coding landscape is rapidly changing, with Apple open-sourcing Swift, and Microsoft aggressively laying cross-platform bridges, and with all native features included. Everything that I have suggested
RE: Business Application Framework
Can be found here :-) https://github.com/montegoulding/lcVCS -Original Message- From: use-livecode [mailto:use-livecode-boun...@lists.runrev.com] On Behalf Of Richard Gaskin Sent: 12 August 2015 21:31 To: use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Subject: Re: Business Application Framework Matthias Rebbe wrote: Am 12.08.2015 um 21:33 schrieb Richard Gaskin: Kevin Miller wrote: If you want VCS in the Open Source Community or Indy edition, there is already lcVCS out there Where? The only lcVCS i am aware of is the free lcVCS plugin from Monte. You can download it at his site at http://www.mergext.com. But you have to register first. I didn't see it there, and using the site's Search box yielded 0 results for lcvcs. Did I just miss it? Is there another option in the community that doesn't require email harvesting? -- 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
Re: Business Application Framework
Paul Richards wrote: Richard Gaskin wrote: Matthias Rebbe wrote: The only lcVCS i am aware of is the free lcVCS plugin from Monte. You can download it at his site at http://www.mergext.com. I didn't see it there, and using the site's Search box yielded 0 results for lcvcs. Can be found here :-) https://github.com/montegoulding/lcVCS Nice! Thanks! And it gets better: Monte has generously chosen the GPLv3 as the distribution license for the project. Thank you Monte! So now we have a few questions: 1. Why hasn't this been more widely promoted? 2. Why hasn't it been submitted to the only resource-sharing tool we have built into the IDE? 3. Monte (or anyone else with a moment): Would you consider posting it to the Sample Stacks repository? On my part I'll see what I can do to get that name changed to something that more accurately reflects the important role that repository can play in our community. Thanks again for finding that, Paul. -- Richard Gaskin LiveCode Community Manager richard at 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: Business Application Framework
Richmond wrote: I don't think LiveCode will thrive if it continues to present itself to the world in the way it is just now. The more people who state their opinion, the more healthy and pluralistic the debate will become, and the more likely that LiveCode will sit up and take notice *seriously*: something I believe it should have done a very long time ago. If all you're asking for is what you wrote, you'd have been satisfied long ago. Given the regular acknowledgement of the opinions presented here, I think it's safe to say they've taken notice. Respectfully, it would seem you're asking for something else, not just taking notice, but actually implementing specific suggestions. But which ones? Our community has offered many suggestions, but taken as a whole they don't always agree, and sometimes even contradict one another. As a community discussion that's fine, but as business guidance it becomes more challenging. Should we put company decisions to a vote? On a certain level that might seem sensible, since we're the customers so it would seem that we know what's best. But we're today's customers, many of us with backgrounds in other xTalks, a dialect largely unknown to the modern world if it weren't for LiveCode. Tomorrow's customers are very different, and anything learned by surveying current customers risks missing critical information about the needs of tomorrow's. A bright future will depend on having new customers outnumber old ones many times over. So maybe we should put company decisions to a vote, but only among newcomers. Or give newcomers 5 votes to our 1. But many newcomers are coming from the open source world, which is important for the growth of the platform but doesn't do as much for immediate short-term revenue. So should we have open source newcomers with 4 votes, and entrepreneur newcomers with 5? And how many of any of us, ol' timers and newcomers alike, have demonstrated experience managing a software company the size of RunRev? And of those, how many have done so in the dev tools space, with its limited Total Addressable Market Size? I think the properly exploiting the opportunity of LiveCode is an inherently non-trivial problem, and will requiring a mix of creativity and courage to explore solutions, because I don't believe I've seen anything like LiveCode before so we have little in the way of rote knowledge to draw from. But if there's anything in recent discussions on which there's anything close to unanimity, whether from ol' timers or newcomers, whether from open source developers or proprietary entrepreneurs, it's that maintaining feature parity between Community and Commercial as close as practical is important for everyone. Now we just have to figure out what as close as practical means -- 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: Business Application Framework
But if there's anything in recent discussions on which there's anything close to unanimity, whether from ol' timers or newcomers, whether from open source developers or proprietary entrepreneurs, it's that maintaining feature parity between Community and Commercial as close as practical is important for everyone.” (from Richard) Agreed wholeheartedly!. Bill On Aug 12, 2015, at 2:49 PM, Monte Goulding mo...@sweattechnologies.com wrote: 1. Why hasn't this been more widely promoted? It's only been promoted on the lists, forums and Facebook. For a while RunRev were going to buy it, then they decided to do their own so I stopped pushing ahead with lcVCS as it appeared to be a waste of time. Now this and maybe it's back in the game.. Not sure yet. 2. Why hasn't it been submitted to the only resource-sharing tool we have built into the IDE? I'm not sure I've ever looked in there... Is it worthwhile? Before you get excited lcVCS doesn't support LC 8 yet because I'd need to depend on IDE code to do it at the moment and that seems risky. That and there appeared to be no point working on it until today... ___ 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: Business Application Framework
It seems that it's very much in the game. Peter's post was especially helpful for two reasons: - It confirms the inherent difficulty in creating a general-purpose VCS tool that covers all edge cases. Yes there were a few of curly issues I had to get my head around. - It clarifies that LiveCode's solution is even more limited in terms of applicable uses cases, specialized for use in this very specific business framework system. Indeed Given this, I think it's well past time for us all to give lcVCS a second look as the community's solution for version control. IIRC the edge cases it may not handle are relatively uncommon anyway, and the value it provides has been strong enough for Trevor to write some very glowing things about. Let's embrace it, enhance it, and make it a centerpiece for all of us who use Github. It would be great to build some interest. One of the problems I found is there’s relatively few people in this community that have any version control experience and so most of them think they don’t need it because they work on their own etc. I think this caused by the circular problem of developers that need version control don’t look at LC because we can’t do it and therefore there’s little understanding of version control in the community. People I have worked on projects with using lcVCS like Trevor and Martin seem to love being about to review their change history etc. Martin didn’t have any version control experience and now works largely on his own but continues to find it helpful. Trevor simply wasn’t interested in working with anyone else unless he had version control. The project from my perspective has two parts. lcVCS is the engine that manages the file format and is GPL. Then I have an IDE plugin and command line interface that I was intending to sell. The plugin provided some cool git integration into the IDE and the command line interface provided something for git hooks to rebuild your stacks when you merge or checkout and to export them asynchronously after an IDE save of the stack so you don’t interrupt your workflow with stackFile exports. The market for such a thing is quite small compared to the work that goes in so the deal to sell it to LiveCode where it would become a regular part of the IDE was appealing but it didn’t come off. At this stage if I were to get stuck into it again I’d like to merge both projects and release under GPL but I’d need some financial backing to afford the time... 2. Why hasn't it been submitted to the only resource-sharing tool we have built into the IDE? I'm not sure I've ever looked in there... Is it worthwhile? Sample Stacks is a bit of a turn-off, and the older RevOnline name wasn't much better. But the role is very very worthwhile: it's where all of us can share stack files easily. I’ll upload today. Before you get excited lcVCS doesn't support LC 8 yet because I'd need to depend on IDE code to do it at the moment and that seems risky. That and there appeared to be no point working on it until today... I wouldn't worry about v8 just yet. It's a very exciting set of new technologies, but it's going to be some months before it's as robust and performant as the current version, and there are still a few design decisions to be completed. I’d like to support 8 if I can so hopefully Peter et al have some ideas on the widget metadata (which widgets are loaded and what their properties are etc). ___ 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: Business Application Framework
@ Kevin: We are non-profit.. I have an Indy license solely for the iOS password protection requirement. Expand my use case to 10,000's of students and educators and hobbyists and web site owners who mix it up with desktop clients and server side API's like I do...if something is over my head, I pay for hours from the brainiacs we all know and love (Andre, and soon others) we are talking 100,000 plus potential users who would not fall into your serious business customers bracket, who every day have to decide if they want to use Unity, Blender, PHP, Ruby, JS, Python for their solutions. LC stands side by side a thriving and dynamically evolving world. We truly are in the middle of a digital revolution. Be careful not to suck the wind out of your own sails. If I want to put my stack out there and get help.. have some others work on it, pro bono.. .or I might pay them for 10-15 hours of work. Someone is inspired... to help... (Jacqueline helped me recently with a little puzzle module improvements.) @Bill Does this make me and those like us... single developer for whom GIT is not important ? hardly... every day recently I thinking about this RVS thing and might resurrect Magic Carpet. @ Kevin wrote: Some features may filter down to open source.. but for the present we are focused on our serious business customers. and It is far more than simply adding ³GitHub to LiveCode. It brings in advanced concepts such as object-orientation, a model-view controller architecture and hooks into data sync and other heavyweight features. It is not for everyone. If you are an individual building an application then you might want to evaluate whether its worth the extra effort, level of complexity and abstractions associated with using it. IMHO: (sorry for the tough talk... we are all friends here... I love you all in Edinburgh! think of this as positive brainstorming... all team players on the same team.) a) All your fund raising campaigns, were promises, We can sit all day and do triage on the roadmap, which features where promised, and to who and who was helping to support future development of what... etc. (I think you have been doing great!) but the whole spirit of where you were going -- your leadership message to the community was a huge promise to us. Which now you say that well some features may be beyond you... so we are going to charge for those. or, as some might take it you might be a dummy so you really don't need those things in your community or Indy world. I humbly suggest this is not the message you want to send to the world. b) Agreed, there may certainly be some things beyond, me, but not beyond others in my category half production manager/half-executive/half educator/half coder e.g. I have an indy license, can't I hire David Bovill or Monte to help with some module for my 100% free-never-see-a-penny in revenue app that I am making? Yep I have a small budget for that but Oh Gee, no collaborative framework, ouch.. .and I can't use all that other cool stuff (object oriented, MVC... whatever) that I thought we were all helping to pay for development of c) suggestion: Some features may filter down to open source Don't wait parse out today, now! Parse out what all those users who have PHP, Ruby, Unity, Javascript staring in their face this very moment, would expect and want that you now propose to put behind a paywall. Do I need cloud services? no... skip that one... do we all need a collaborative framework duh! How will you *ever* achieve your goal of have LC be one of the top ten languages with that that? go down that list today. Move features over to the open source column today. d) @ Lyn Teyla: Ditto what Lyn said... she (he?) pretty well defined c) above. e) #@ Andrew: lighten up dude! LC still gets the job done. Give Kevin credit for steering the ship as well as he has... it's not an easy job! On a positive note: At the end of the day I will still be using LiveCode.. in the past three weeks I'm building my first mobile app. I must finish a complete working prototype by September 15. (rarely do I have that kind of deadline) I know for a fact that had I done this in any other language... or even hired someone competent in any other language... that we would still be at phase one and not anywhere near close to how far I have come in less than 30 man hours.. Lynn Fredricks wrote: That said, I'm a single developer, so git isn't important to me. Also, if the purpose of the Indy license was to support single developers, working alone, would git be particularly attractive? Just asking. Bill That makes sense to me, Bill. I cannot comment specifically on the Business Application Framework, but if we are talking specifically about team features, aren't team features contrary to the idea of an indie license - which to me, suggests working on your own projects as an indie developer. Best
Re: Business Application Framework
Monte Goulding wrote: 1. Why hasn't this been more widely promoted? It's only been promoted on the lists, forums and Facebook. For a while RunRev were going to buy it, then they decided to do their own so I stopped pushing ahead with lcVCS as it appeared to be a waste of time. Now this and maybe it's back in the game.. Not sure yet. It seems that it's very much in the game. Peter's post was especially helpful for two reasons: - It confirms the inherent difficulty in creating a general-purpose VCS tool that covers all edge cases. - It clarifies that LiveCode's solution is even more limited in terms of applicable uses cases, specialized for use in this very specific business framework system. Given this, I think it's well past time for us all to give lcVCS a second look as the community's solution for version control. IIRC the edge cases it may not handle are relatively uncommon anyway, and the value it provides has been strong enough for Trevor to write some very glowing things about. Let's embrace it, enhance it, and make it a centerpiece for all of us who use Github. 2. Why hasn't it been submitted to the only resource-sharing tool we have built into the IDE? I'm not sure I've ever looked in there... Is it worthwhile? Sample Stacks is a bit of a turn-off, and the older RevOnline name wasn't much better. But the role is very very worthwhile: it's where all of us can share stack files easily. In a recent meeting with Kevin it was clear he recognizes the value of that role, and we both agree the name needs to be changed one more time to make sure it reflects the useful role for us to share things. He's working with the team to see if that can happen soon. In the meantime, any of us can upload it there, esp. given your generous choice of GPL for its license. But one of the nice things about your posting it is that it reflects your name, and given how much work you put into it I'm all in favor of anything that provides as much recognition as possible for you. Before you get excited lcVCS doesn't support LC 8 yet because I'd need to depend on IDE code to do it at the moment and that seems risky. That and there appeared to be no point working on it until today... I wouldn't worry about v8 just yet. It's a very exciting set of new technologies, but it's going to be some months before it's as robust and performant as the current version, and there are still a few design decisions to be completed. For now the company's revenue is dependent on the current version, v7, and with v6 soon to be EOL'd we all need to make sure v7 is rock solid for us anyway. So lets dive in with lcVCS in v7 today, and with any luck the project will attract enough contributors that they'll be able to handle at least some of whatever work may be needed to port it to v8 later, allowing you to maximize the time you spend on your externals which the community depends on as well. -- Richard Gaskin LiveCode Community Manager rich...@livecode.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: Business Application Framework
Andrew Kluthe wrote: ...I'm pretty shocked to that native GIT support and a proper MVC-style framework for livecode isn't part of Livecode Community. I think this is a big mistake on the part of the steward company of this software. I get the framework thing even, almost. But basic Version Control support? Wowsa. That's some third rate nickel and diming of your user base. All that stuff people were worried about happening a few weeks back in emails, and all the damage control that was done on part of the community leaders seems like it was justified after seeing this. To clarify, my own opinions at that time were based on a single email mention of a camera widget with exotic functionality. Now that we're talking about a much broader scope, and especially given the central role of VCS in fostering healthy open source work, my opinion is now more open than before, and somewhat undecided. If it turns out that we've had a great open source option the whole time and just never realized it, the situation is somewhat mitigated. I don't know if lcVCS is available under GPL-compatible license, and if so that would seem a good option. But then again, if it's a good option why would LiveCode Ltd undertake the non-trivial expense of writing a completely different tool? These are open questions, for which I currently have no answer. So before you feel tempted to indulge in name-calling like fanboys and shills, please consider that there are individuals involved, and the range of opinions may be as diverse as their are people. My own volunteer role is to help implement an effective open source strategy through community engagement. To the degree that this is something LiveCode Ltd is committed to, and as long as we continue to see community members willing to help as we have with the Documentation, Translation, and Educational Outreach teams, I remain at the service of this community to help see it through. -- 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: Business Application Framework
Monte said himself that he was going to stop improving it in major ways as he expected Livecode Community to have native git support that Livecode Community's steward company was working on. Many of us thought this feature was probably a WHEN and not and IF. Sure it wasn't in the open source roadmap but most of us assumed that the features available in the open source version didn't STOP at the roadmap's end. These decisions increasingly seem to indicate that the alarmist rhetoric surrounding the possibility of a nerfed/restricted community version wasn't so much alarmist rhetoric as actual concerns that we are starting to see manifest here. I feel like this is a programming version of a free to play game. Sure it's free but if you want do anything serious with it you are going to have to grind like crazy or pay a premium in the form of in-game tokens. There is a reason those kind of games are both generating tons of income for those hooked by it while simultaneously being reviled at large. On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 3:36 PM Paul Richards p...@smarttsoftware.co.uk wrote: Can be found here :-) https://github.com/montegoulding/lcVCS -Original Message- From: use-livecode [mailto:use-livecode-boun...@lists.runrev.com] On Behalf Of Richard Gaskin Sent: 12 August 2015 21:31 To: use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Subject: Re: Business Application Framework Matthias Rebbe wrote: Am 12.08.2015 um 21:33 schrieb Richard Gaskin: Kevin Miller wrote: If you want VCS in the Open Source Community or Indy edition, there is already lcVCS out there Where? The only lcVCS i am aware of is the free lcVCS plugin from Monte. You can download it at his site at http://www.mergext.com. But you have to register first. I didn't see it there, and using the site's Search box yielded 0 results for lcvcs. Did I just miss it? Is there another option in the community that doesn't require email harvesting? -- 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 -- Kind regards, Andrew Kluthe ___ 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: Business Application Framework
On 12/08/15 23:52, Andrew Kluthe wrote: Monte said himself that he was going to stop improving it in major ways as he expected Livecode Community to have native git support that Livecode Community's steward company was working on. Many of us thought this feature was probably a WHEN and not and IF. Sure it wasn't in the open source roadmap but most of us assumed that the features available in the open source version didn't STOP at the roadmap's end. Quite. I was led to believe (whether by what RunRev/LiveCode stated at the time, or my own naivety coupled with my unbounded enthusiasm at the possibility of an Open Source version) that the Open Source version would always maintain *feature parity* with the Commercial version beyond the ability to password protect scripts. These decisions increasingly seem to indicate that the alarmist rhetoric surrounding the possibility of a nerfed/restricted community version wasn't so much alarmist rhetoric as actual concerns that we are starting to see manifest here. One of my other names is Cassandra. I feel like this is a programming version of a free to play game. Sure it's free but if you want do anything serious with it you are going to have to grind like crazy or pay a premium in the form of in-game tokens. There is a reason those kind of games are both generating tons of income for those hooked by it while simultaneously being reviled at large. Yup: I have had quite a few kids who attend my school getting themselves into the brown stuff by entering the numbers from Daddy's credit card during those games. When I got my iPad I installed a couple of mahjong games I like, but deleted both of them within a week because of the cough up now for jazzier layouts messages that would come up and block the screen at important moments. If I'm going to buy something, I'm going to buy something; but if something is offered to me as free I'm just not going to pay later. What an old friend of mine used to call A right Whoreson's. Even if nothing else, LiveCode have successfully managed to alienate a significant number of their much-vaunted 'community'; and it is obvious that they intended to do this (unless they are even more insensitive than I am) as they have had about 3 stabs at it since the release of the Open Source version - each one increasingly snotty. 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: Business Application Framework
On 12/08/15 23:59, Brahmanathaswami wrote: @ Kevin: We are non-profit.. I have an Indy license solely for the iOS password protection requirement. Expand my use case to 10,000's of students and educators and hobbyists and web site owners who mix it up with desktop clients and server side API's like I do...if something is over my head, I pay for hours from the brainiacs we all know and love (Andre, and soon others) we are talking 100,000 plus potential users who would not fall into your serious business customers bracket, who every day have to decide if they want to use Unity, Blender, PHP, Ruby, JS, Python for their solutions. LC stands side by side a thriving and dynamically evolving world. We truly are in the middle of a digital revolution. Be careful not to suck the wind out of your own sails. If I want to put my stack out there and get help.. have some others work on it, pro bono.. .or I might pay them for 10-15 hours of work. Someone is inspired... to help... (Jacqueline helped me recently with a little puzzle module improvements.) @Bill Does this make me and those like us... single developer for whom GIT is not important ? hardly... every day recently I thinking about this RVS thing and might resurrect Magic Carpet. @ Kevin wrote: Some features may filter down to open source.. but for the present we are focused on our serious business customers. and It is far more than simply adding ³GitHub to LiveCode. It brings in advanced concepts such as object-orientation, a model-view controller architecture and hooks into data sync and other heavyweight features. It is not for everyone. If you are an individual building an application then you might want to evaluate whether its worth the extra effort, level of complexity and abstractions associated with using it. IMHO: (sorry for the tough talk... we are all friends here... I love you all in Edinburgh! think of this as positive brainstorming... all team players on the same team.) a) All your fund raising campaigns, were promises, We can sit all day and do triage on the roadmap, which features where promised, and to who and who was helping to support future development of what... etc. (I think you have been doing great!) but the whole spirit of where you were going -- your leadership message to the community was a huge promise to us. Which now you say that well some features may be beyond you... so we are going to charge for those. or, as some might take it you might be a dummy so you really don't need those things in your community or Indy world. I humbly suggest this is not the message you want to send to the world. b) Agreed, there may certainly be some things beyond, me, but not beyond others in my category half production manager/half-executive/half educator/half coder e.g. I have an indy license, can't I hire David Bovill or Monte to help with some module for my 100% free-never-see-a-penny in revenue app that I am making? Yep I have a small budget for that but Oh Gee, no collaborative framework, ouch.. .and I can't use all that other cool stuff (object oriented, MVC... whatever) that I thought we were all helping to pay for development of c) suggestion: Some features may filter down to open source Don't wait parse out today, now! Parse out what all those users who have PHP, Ruby, Unity, Javascript staring in their face this very moment, would expect and want that you now propose to put behind a paywall. Do I need cloud services? no... skip that one... do we all need a collaborative framework duh! How will you *ever* achieve your goal of have LC be one of the top ten languages with that that? go down that list today. Move features over to the open source column today. d) @ Lyn Teyla: Ditto what Lyn said... she (he?) pretty well defined c) above. e) #@ Andrew: lighten up dude! LC still gets the job done. Give Kevin credit for steering the ship as well as he has... it's not an easy job! On a positive note: At the end of the day I will still be using LiveCode.. in the past three weeks I'm building my first mobile app. I must finish a complete working prototype by September 15. (rarely do I have that kind of deadline) I know for a fact that had I done this in any other language... or even hired someone competent in any other language... that we would still be at phase one and not anywhere near close to how far I have come in less than 30 man hours.. *Brahmanathaswami* has basically said what I have said, although, admittedly, in a slightly more tactful way. There are other voices out there who are reading this thread at the moment, but are saying nothing or very little. This debate is important (whichever way your opinions swings!), especially if you care about LiveCode; in terms of its Open Source arm, it Commercial arm, and its survival. I don't think LiveCode will thrive if it continues to present itself to the world in the way it
Re: Business Application Framework
Richmond wrote: I feel for Richard Gaskin a lot as he is caught between the Devil and the Deep Blue Sea, and doing that for nothing as well: not fun at times, I'm sure. I appreciate your concern, but my experience is very much the opposite: I'm not on any payroll but my own; I am not an employee of LiveCode Ltd. My role is as a volunteer, and focused solely on fostering the Community Edition through open source process. So for better or for worse, any words I write here are my own. If they seem optimistic at times it's only because I try to keep my attention focused on actionable outcomes. -- 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: Business Application Framework
On 13/08/15 00:20, Richard Gaskin wrote: Richmond wrote: I feel for Richard Gaskin a lot as he is caught between the Devil and the Deep Blue Sea, and doing that for nothing as well: not fun at times, I'm sure. I appreciate your concern, but my experience is very much the opposite: I'm not on any payroll but my own; I am not an employee of LiveCode Ltd. My role is as a volunteer, and focused solely on fostering the Community Edition through open source process. So for better or for worse, any words I write here are my own. If they seem optimistic at times it's only because I try to keep my attention focused on actionable outcomes. I'm only on my payroll as well, and it does give one a marvellous sense of freedom. However, as I am a lot further away from the mothership than you are I am not very good at assessing which outcomes are actionable. As I stated earlier: I see my role as a provoker of debate, because debate IS needed if we are not to become like some cult taking orders from on high and continually going Yes. However, I do think that the person who said Good luck list/livecode community, I'll see you later. is not helping at all. That is just negative flack that does not lead anywhere. If that person really wanted to wish the community some 'luck' s/he would continue to join in the debate and address the points that have been raised so far in some sort of constructive fashion. 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: Business Application Framework
Am 12.08.2015 um 22:31 schrieb Richard Gaskin ambassa...@fourthworld.com: Matthias Rebbe wrote: The only lcVCS i am aware of is the free lcVCS plugin from Monte. You can download it at his site at http://www.mergext.com. But you have to register first. I didn't see it there, and using the site's Search box yielded 0 results for lcvcs. Did I just miss it? Is there another option in the community that doesn't require email harvesting? Hi, as the plugin is published under GNU general public license i think its okay if i share an other download link. Please find it at https://dl.dropbox.com/s/fo9bnxmp1ismimk/index.html Matthias -- 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
Re: Business Application Framework
On 12/08/15 23:52, Richard Gaskin wrote: Andrew Kluthe wrote: ...I'm pretty shocked to that native GIT support and a proper MVC-style framework for livecode isn't part of Livecode Community. I think this is a big mistake on the part of the steward company of this software. I get the framework thing even, almost. But basic Version Control support? Wowsa. That's some third rate nickel and diming of your user base. All that stuff people were worried about happening a few weeks back in emails, and all the damage control that was done on part of the community leaders seems like it was justified after seeing this. To clarify, my own opinions at that time were based on a single email mention of a camera widget with exotic functionality. Now that we're talking about a much broader scope, and especially given the central role of VCS in fostering healthy open source work, my opinion is now more open than before, and somewhat undecided. If it turns out that we've had a great open source option the whole time and just never realized it, the situation is somewhat mitigated. I don't know if lcVCS is available under GPL-compatible license, and if so that would seem a good option. But then again, if it's a good option why would LiveCode Ltd undertake the non-trivial expense of writing a completely different tool? These are open questions, for which I currently have no answer. So before you feel tempted to indulge in name-calling like fanboys and shills, please consider that there are individuals involved, and the range of opinions may be as diverse as their are people. My own volunteer role is to help implement an effective open source strategy through community engagement. To the degree that this is something LiveCode Ltd is committed to, and as long as we continue to see community members willing to help as we have with the Documentation, Translation, and Educational Outreach teams, I remain at the service of this community to help see it through. I, for one am not going to characterise R. Gaskin or Ms Gay as fanboys; fans yes, but that does not mean that they are zombie-like uncritical cheerleaders (even though . . .). I, odd as it may seem, am also a fan Big Time of LiveCode. If I were not a fan of LiveCode I would not have spent all the time I have spent this evening on that monster post . . .but either gone and sought out another xTalk programming environment, or language, or just, simply kept on programming my own stuff with LiveCode as it is at the moment. I feel for Richard Gaskin a lot as he is caught between the Devil and the Deep Blue Sea, and doing that for nothing as well: not fun at times, I'm sure. I also feel for Kevin Miller as I believe he is one of the most creative and innovative programming minds there is, and I hate to see him mucking things up for the simple reason that he is trying to do his own PR when he should stick at what he does best. Perhaps, instead of hiring the next programmer LiveCode should seriously consider hiring a marketing manager who knows something about phraseology and won't send out stuff about new ideas of LiveCode that come out all wrong and use phrases [c.f. 'happy dance'] that are completely stylistically inappropriate for that context. 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: Business Application Framework
Indeed this is what I was told. I thought I had convinced Kevin that version control needed to stop being an afterthought on this platform and start being something that just works with the core offering. The platform wouldn't even be considered by most developers because of the binary format. Yes version control IS that important! What a disappointment... Sent from my iPhone On 13 Aug 2015, at 6:52 am, Andrew Kluthe and...@ctech.me wrote: Monte said himself that he was going to stop improving it in major ways as he expected Livecode Community to have native git support that Livecode Community's steward company was working on. ___ 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: Business Application Framework
Harrumph! As an Indie license holder, I'm not serious? Hmm. Bad choice of words, probably. I'm glad Richmond is stimulating this discussion. Lots of other good comments in this thread. Bill William Prothero http://ed.earthednet.org On Aug 12, 2015, at 1:15 PM, Richmond richmondmathew...@gmail.com wrote: Kevin Miller wrote: The Business Application Framework is a framework for writing more serious applications in LiveCode. Am I the only one who feels a wee bit insulted? OK, OK, I know that I am a very small frog in the relatively large LiveCode pond . . . but I consider my /Devawriter /serious, even if nobody else does. Is this statement to be taken to imply that only applications built for business are to be taken seriously? Now a very large number of people who contribute [Hey, there's a word which might well be shouted around a bit; 'contribute' along with 'community'] to the Use-List and the Forums are involved in far more serious programming exercises than I am, if by 'serious' we mean programs that go in for really 'heavy lifting' - I wonder? If you want features for free then you can make them, or look to see if they are part of our extensive crowd-funded road map and thus either being provided or coming shortly. If you want us to provide things outside of that then yes, it costs money for us to make them. Well, I am sure it costs money for us to make them, but then, I don't live in Britain any longer and am out of the loop where everybody talks to everybody as if they are blithering idiots (saw a load more of this in England 2 weeks ago: hence this being written on the back of a jar of peanut butter: May contain nuts). Now how are we simple folk to tell what are 'features' (i.e stuff that is to be bolted on), and what are just standard parts of LiveCode? As far as I understood all the hype surrounding the Open Source drive for the Kickstarter the whole idea was that we would put money into a pot, and then both that and any subsequent contributions, whether money, code snippets, or 'features' we authored would be rolled into LiveCode for the common good of 'the community'. coming shortly . . . um, Ms Gay . . . so NOT all of the items on the road map are ready yet; no need to look at the roadmap - Kevin has told us. Options like this framework, together with things like the technical support options, might be a big help in getting additional value and productivity advantages from the platform. additional value and productivity advantages are just ad-man-speak: we can all walk the walk and talk the talk if we need to, but those phrases are ethereal and almost semantically empty. What the heck is a productivity advantage when it is at home? Do you mean things will move more quickly, be easier to program??? Well, if so, say so. might: first rule of reading stuff: never trust a modal verb. for now, they are aimed carefully at the needs of our more serious business customers. Aha . . . so, presumably, LiveCode (the company formerly known as RunRev) held an open, and above board consultation session that was properly documented with its/their more serious business customers??? Where does that leave the other business customers? The ones that, by implication, LiveCode considers foolish and lacking in the level of seriousness to warrant consultation. VCS has already been pointed out by Richard Gaskin . . . out there . . . why do I feel that somebody somewhere is being played for a fool? That fool is not me; I'm already the unofficial LiveCode court jester, and I am doing my happy dance here with my stick with a pig's bladder on the end of it. Oh, and I real wonder how serious business customers are going to seriously consider a message that uses such an infantile phrase as a happy dance in it? However, I do realise that there are several things quite seriously wrong with me: 1. Every time condescending, arrogant puff comes out of the mothership I am incapable of keeping my mouth shut. 2. I am, as Andrew Kluth mentioned just now, a fanboy insofar as I think LiveCode is just about the best programming/coding IDE/RAD? whateveryoucallit there is, and it is a fantastic tool to introduce programming to children. 3. I don't have 25 million pounds so I can buy out LiveCode and boss them around instead. 4. I think LiveCode have seriously [hey, there's that word again] lost the plot in several important ways. 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
Re: Business Application Framework
On 13 Aug 2015, at 9:52 am, Monte Goulding mo...@sweattechnologies.com wrote: Sample Stacks is a bit of a turn-off, and the older RevOnline name wasn't much better. But the role is very very worthwhile: it's where all of us can share stack files easily. I’ll upload today. Hmm… can’t upload because lcVCS is more than just one stack… I’d have to build a stack that sucked lcVCS stack into custom properties then installed it. Why doesn’t this thing support zip files... ___ 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: Business Application Framework
On 08/12/2015 05:45 PM, Monte Goulding wrote: Why doesn’t this thing support zip files... Indeed. -- Mark Wieder ahsoftw...@gmail.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: Business Application Framework
Richard Gaskin wrote: So lets dive in with lcVCS in v7 today, and with any luck the project will attract enough contributors that they'll be able to handle at least some of whatever work may be needed to port it to v8 later, allowing you to maximize the time you spend on your externals which the community depends on as well. Good positive move to take the energy from this somewhat tense thread to pour into a useful direction. Though I still think it behooves Kevin to consider VCS for the whole community -- it would be HUGE for his goals to make LC one of the world's top languages. I did study the Git book and that level of code control, played with it for a while using some scripts on the web server... I found myself spending more and more time on the cmd line than I would have liked. No doubt one who is using GIT a lot will become very efficient.. It certainly is a powerful tool. But for one level of user it's a bit time consuming and feels like it gets in the way... Meanwhile... I guess what I'm saying is, a full blown GIT management of scripts is scary to me when I would be content with document control... where a stack is a document and in some contexts it can simply be shared with someone else or checked out they work on it and check it back in ... while it is check out I can't touch it. If there were some way to regress and view changes that would be super, but not necessarily required. A simple approach is, Person A gives it Person B and B makes improvements. If nothing is broken... keep on going.. if person B messes up... we delete his version and regress back one and keep going... I made my own magic carpet in-house for InDesign document RCS and our team loves it. We have, in 4 years since we abandoned Adobe's version control, not lost any work or the the ability to regress to a previous version. 12 people working on the same document repositories on the LAN server. It would be simple for me to adapt my model to include HTTP calls to the server. The model is super simple: document is archived and checked in... if it is checked out by someone else, you can't touch it. When someone else checks it back in, another copy is made both on the server and locally. At anytime something breaks (iteraton21.livecode) there's copies of the last revision (iteration20.livecode) in 3 places, on user's A hard drive, the server and on user B hard drive. We can always recover. Its simple but robust pass the baton. RCS I realize that the super coders would find that simply too limiting... but I think it works for a lot of not-so-edge cases. A strong Video screen tutorial on lcVCS might be useful. I want to see if that's where I want to go, or resurrect Magic Carpet... Perhaps there is, within lcVCS a way to keep it that simple. Monte... do you have documentation I can read somewhere? I have a need coming up here soon. I'm in the middle of working on a mobile app, and will shortly reach my limits and then I'll want to pass it off to others to improve, re-factor my code if necessary and fill out the features that are beyond my competency. So I'm scratching my head right now about just how to do that. Methods now are painful: FTP to server... send someone an email. manually change file names etc... Maybe we need to move this to a new thread? Anyone ever hear from Chip in Texas? (author of Magic Carpet) Altuit.com not longer seems to be up. Chipp seems to have moved on to other planets: http://blog.chipp.com/ Cheers from Hawaii. Monte, I hope your farm is not too cold down there! Brahmanathaswami ___ 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: Business Application Framework
On 08/12/2015 02:27 PM, Richmond wrote: However, I do think that the person who said Good luck list/livecode community, I'll see you later. is not helping at all. That is just negative flack that does not lead anywhere. Agreed, although I have to admit I understand and have been tending in that direction myself lately. -- Mark Wieder ahsoftw...@gmail.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
