On 18/08/14 21:18, Charles E Buchwald wrote:
I was under the impression that the Open Language initiative is to follow the
usual open source model, and have some kind of gatekeeper who includes new,
useful, user-contributed additions to the latest release. I could be wrong
about that, though.
- Charles
Um; Juvenal asked the inevitable question at least 2000 years ago:
"/*Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?"
*/
On 18 Aug 2014, at 12:58 PM, Richmond <richmondmathew...@gmail.com> wrote:
On 16/08/14 22:13, Richmond wrote:
AND . . .
Open Language.
This seems very awkward.
Let us just suppose Fred Flintstone writes an extension to the Livecode
language (what is it called again?)
that is very clever . . .
1. Does he, somehow, infect all subsequent versions of Livecode with his
extension?
2. Does he make his extension extension available as a sort of patch that other
Livecode users can
choose to apply or not?
3. How does this get into the Dictionary?
4. Does it remain a sort of "in" secret between Fred and his chosen sub-cult?
Barney Rubble.
What chance an answer to this?
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 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
