On 11/04/2011 13:39, "Wilhelm Sanke" <sa...@hrz.uni-kassel.de> wrote:

> Kevin, you are welcome. Thank you for the almost instant reply.
> What we were somewhat unhappy about (see some of the posts in the recent
> thread "[MC_IDE] Quick Poll") was that it had become more difficult than

Unfortunately I don't have time to digest this entire thread today.

> before to integrate the new Livecode engines into the MC IDE and that we
> needed one and a half year to build a new MC standalone builder. Richard
> Gaskin is going to deliver that new one during the next weeks.

It is a lot of work to maintain any IDE and as the number of capabilities
and supported platforms have expanded, standalone building has by definition
had many features added to it. We have made it as simple as is possible
while providing that expanded feature set. Indeed the process of building a
basic standalone is simpler than it has ever been.

> Could you possibly do something about this and facilitate these
> processes of integration for future versions of Livecode? This must not
> be too difficult.
> Many thanks in advance and best regards,

My offer was to continue to support your capability to keep your IDE up to
date by making it possible to continue to integrate engines and new features
if you chose to do so. To that end we provided complete details of what is
required to update your standalone builder to the keeper of your IDE when
last requested a long, long time ago (over a year at least).

I did not offer to write the MC IDE for you and such an offer would not have
been welcome, we already maintain an IDE, this is your IDE which is open
source. It is down to those that maintain MetaCard to keep it up to date.

I'm sure the current keeper of your IDE can verify this, and that
consequently your statements are quite unfounded.

Kind regards,


Kevin Miller ~ ke...@runrev.com ~ http://www.runrev.com/
LiveCode: Compile-free coding, the faster path to better apps

metacard mailing list

Reply via email to