jan wrote:
Storing data is an enticing idea, but flawed: stacks are not a multi-user data
storage infrastructure.
You are of course right for multi-user scenarios.
but I beg to differ in cases where
a) the data is read only for web delivery or for the majority of users
b) the editors are
On 9 Aug 2011, at 19:20, Pierre Sahores wrote:
Hi Björnke,
FOR ME The main goal of using the server's stack component is to let us
store our code as password protected libraries
I fixed your point above. The problem is exactly that mindset. This time your
user case was supported. Are
Hello Björnke,
We probably need to get in mind that desktop apps stacks and server's stacks
are not dedicated to do the same jobs !
On the left, desktop apps stacks are handled in RAM as long running processes
and this give us lots of possibilities, sockets management included. If you
really
Again, Robert I have to disagree with you about this. You seem to feel
shortchanged somehow with the way stacks work on the server, yet it's really
doing all it can do in that environment.
What else would you want a stack to do on a server? The GUI has to be
created in HTML - it's a web browser
stephen barncard wrote:
Again, Robert I have to disagree with you about this. You seem to feel
shortchanged somehow with the way stacks work on the server, yet it's really
doing all it can do in that environment.
What else would you want a stack to do on a server? The GUI has to be
created in
Quite simply, any new feature RunRev implements is a patch, as in patched up
clothes. RunRev lacks the manpower (but not the dedication) to create fully
working groundworks, like a full implementation of stacks for all platforms, a
native GUI for iOS, native table fields or allowing all objects
separately.
Have a good day,
Robert
--
View this message in context:
http://runtime-revolution.278305.n4.nabble.com/Server-create-stack-trouble-tp3721781p3730360.html
Sent from the Revolution - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
use-livecode
Hi Björnke,
The main goal of using the server's stack component is to let us store our code
as password protected libraries instead of storing it in unprotected flat text
.irev components. This server's stack component is useful each time we need to
install our LC-server solutions on clients
I agree, Pierre,
Nice job from RunRev guys. Now the On-Rev client has to be updated, and all
will be perfect.
Jacques
2011/8/9 Pierre Sahores s...@sahores-conseil.com
Hi Björnke,
The main goal of using the server's stack component is to let us store our
code as password protected libraries
Hi Jacques,
Stephen (Brancard) noticed some days ago that in double clicking any server's
stack from within our FTP browser window, the stack will be directly opened in
our LC desktop IDE. In this way, we can edit our code exactly as if the stack
went stored locally and we can use the IDE
of
process, but not in that precise publishing situation. Or do I miss
something?
So yes it would be deceiving to learn stacks cannot be saved in the server
environnment!
--
View this message in context:
http://runtime-revolution.278305.n4.nabble.com/Server-create-stack-trouble
Why would one want to create a field one can't use anyway?
There are probably a lot of little things in LCS that haven't been trapped
as errors or to fail silently yet, but common sense can be a guide to what
is and what isn't: GUI objects are not applicable in a server
environment.
Reading
).
-- and keeping in line with the original spirit of the hypercard heritage
too!
Now I reckon things are now usable as they are and it's a a great step
already.
--
View this message in context:
http://runtime-revolution.278305.n4.nabble.com/Server-create-stack-trouble-tp3721781p3727611.html
Sent from
Robert, on my installation of LIvecode Server, everything you say I've found
to be true, except that I was able to use my preferred suffix .rev instead
of .livecode.
I'm impressed that there are so many things are *right* and *up to date* in
the docs lately, imho. On this new stuff, there's sure
in a database and each time a page
is loaded recreate the set of stacks and cards.
--
View this message in context:
http://runtime-revolution.278305.n4.nabble.com/Server-create-stack-trouble-tp3721781p3724846.html
Sent from the Revolution - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com
...@lists.runrev.com
Cc:
Sent: Sunday, August 7, 2011 3:15 PM
Subject: Re: [Server] create stack trouble
I have added an enhancement request to the QCC to have 'save stack'
implemented on LiveCode Server, Report #9664
Is there another way to save a stack that I am missing?
Is there a reason why
.278305.n4.nabble.com/Server-create-stack-trouble-tp3721781p3724846.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 upload them but I
thought what possibilities would there be if you could create and modify
them on the fly in using LiveCode server.
Martin
--
View this message in context:
http://runtime-revolution.278305.n4.nabble.com/Server-create-stack-trouble-tp3721781p3725243.html
Sent from the Revolution
I would love to use stacks instead of files. Millions of sites work just fine
saving stuff into files, despite them not being multi user save or anything
weird like that.
More importantly, stacks should work like stacks everywhere, and not partially
on mobile, partially (but different) as
in a many to many kind of
process, but not in that precise publishing situation. Or do I miss
something?
So yes it would be deceiving to learn stacks cannot be saved in the server
environnment!
--
View this message in context:
http://runtime-revolution.278305.n4.nabble.com/Server-create-stack-trouble
20 matches
Mail list logo
