Kevin Miller wrote:
given the complexity of it + obfuscation you won¹t realistically be able
to make much sense of it. There is a whole world of difference between
obfuscated/unreadable JavaScript protected by copyright and the GPL, which
requires you to upload the stacks for your entire application with
readable, editable and redistributable code.
Understood.
That does help.. .thanks Kevin.
So if we create an app under GPL, then we just need a URL where anyone
can get source.
I remember years ago reading a white paper from Adobe on the JS that
was being exported from GoLive, in which they stated "be aware that the
level of abstraction of the Javascript exported by GoLive is such that
it will in all likelihood be virtually incomprehensible...." or
something along those lines. I presume were trying to forestall any
complaints from developers who thought they could work in WSIWIG and
then subsequently tweak/customize the JS after it was dumped from GoLive.
As a non-profit, edu org we really have no interest in doing any closed
source web apps, and the only reason I do own and continue to own a
LiveCode commercial license is because of Apple's policies for getting
into their store. Ergo the "perk" to get an Indy commercial HTML5
license is not much of one for us here . This I can see might be
important for other developers though. Especially if you are doing apps
for other clients. (never a case for us)
Maybe Heather can find some other perks for us that I can use to
convince the purse holders here contribute to the campaign. (I wrote to
her already)
_______________________________________________
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
